Transcript of Covid Whistleblower: Predicting Pandemics & Exposing the CIA and Peter Daszak’s Alliance With China

So I think most people have concluded that the creation of COVID was probably not what they told us. It probably didn't evolve naturally out of a pangolin in a seafood market. And the Wuhan Institute of Urology probably played a role. The US government played a role. But it is impossible to find anyone, or has been for us anyway, to find anyone who has direct connection to any of the main players here. None of them will do an interview. None. You were the vice President of the EcoHealth Alliance. You're a military guy, ties the Intel world. You worked at a federal nuclear lab in New Mexico for years, and then you wind up and you're a scientist, PhD, and then you wind up working for ECHO Health Alliance in New York City. You think it's this World Wildlife Fund operation designed to track diseases among wildlife globally and protect the wildlife, protect the people. It's a crunchy outfit. It's do-gooders, basically. You show up there, you help them raise a bunch of money from the feds, and you become the vice president, and then you discover it's not what you thought. That's the story that you told me at breakfast, which is an amazing story.

Thank you again for coming. I'm going to bow out now and let you continue the story from there, assuming I've been faithful in my rendition of it so far.

That's perfectly accurate. Thank you for having me. This is like a dream of mine.

Oh, well, I'm so excited you're here. And because this has been gnawing at me, where did COVID come from? And how was the US government implicated? It clearly was, but you never meet anyone who can say that they know the players, but you do. With that, you show up there, you become VP of ECHO Health Alliance, the now famous ECHO Health Alliance. When did you start to realize this wasn't the World Wildlife Fund?

Shortly after I was working there. I was hired as a senior scientist to take over a... I learned after the fact, I lied to, but it was a failing department that was doing predictive forecasting and analytics. And after I brought in all that money from the Department of Defense, I It actually saved Eco-Health Alliance. It was financially on the rocks. That $4 million really transformed the organization. And with that, in my expertise in technology, I was actually improving the systems and technology company-wide. Peter Dasik, who is the President or CEO of Equal Health Alliance, liked everything that I was doing. He was very impressed.

Peter Dasik is like a figure out of history now. I mean, Peter Dasik is at the very center of COVID.

Oh, absolutely. And we'll get to that. So Peter It promotes me to vice President, and then I start attending executive meetings, and I get involved in all the different other aspects of the company, or at least visibility to what's going on. The main driver of funding of Equal Alliance was from this program called Predict. And Predict was funded by USAID to go out and conduct global surveillance of infectious diseases to predict and forecast emerging pandemics. At least that's what they were telling everyone they were going to do.

That seems like a virtuous thing to do, by the way.

No, and it seemed I was completely virtuous. And I had actually been doing that type of research my entire career, at least as a scientist and engineer. And I was doing that type of work at the National Laboratory. I continued that work funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency when I was at Equal Alliance. That's where the first big check comes from for $4. 6 million. And once I'm promoted and I'm looking at this USAID predict program, I decided to go dig into the literature and all the technical reports to see what this is and how it actually works. I read through this phone book of material, and I assess that it's a giant boon doggle. There's no way that they're going to be able to predict or forecast infectious diseases. They weren't collecting enough samples globally or in the countries where they were collecting them. They weren't collecting the data on a systematic and routine basis, which is one of the fundamental core concepts in biosurveillance. And you start to ask a question.

This is your area, I should just say, you've done a lot of research into how do you model this out? How do you collect the data? How do you analyze it?

I make the bold claim that I'm probably one of the world's leading experts in the area. I'm one of the few people to actually predict and forecast infectious diseases before they've occurred. And I've done it in peer-reviewed literature. And I was actually so bold when I built my models and tested them, I actually had this published in. I think it was the Guardian newspaper, the New York Post before the outbreak hit. And this was the Zika. You remember Zika virus? Very I was working at Eco Health Alliance. One of the models that I developed actually forecasted the amount of Zika virus that we'd receive in the United States and where, specifically. And I published that before it happened.

So you were very familiar with the technical details of a study of this kind, of monitoring of this? How big is the sample have to be in order to do this?

Well, so the devil's always in the details. It depends on the characteristics of the infectious disease agent. They're talking about the population population, where that population is located, the type of infrastructure. There's a lot of technical nuance because it's how healthy is the population? What is the probability that they'll be exposed to something? And then what are the likely transmission dynamics within that population? And does it have the ability to go from a small isolated outbreak to an epidemic to a pandemic?

But because this is your specific area, you look at the details of what ECHO Health Alliance, your new employer, is now doing, and it's immediately obvious to you? Like instantly obvious that this is not real.

It wasn't real. The real crazy aspect of here is that once I'm promoted, I'm going to all these different meetings with the funders of the program. So Dr Dennis Carroll, who is the program manager, program director at USAID, who had a very close relationship with Dr. Peter Dasik. And these fundraising events we're doing where we're telling everyone that we're going to forecast and predict these emerging infectious diseases that can cause pandemics. And I'm sitting in the audience and I'm watching my boss and these other people telling everyone that they're doing this. And like I mentioned, if you look at the technical reports, it's just very clear that this is not technically possible. So it begs the question as me being an ethical person and a good scientist, an engineer, what are we doing here?

Because we're not doing the thing we said we were doing.

Exactly. And it gets a little darker than that real quick. So once I'm sitting in these executive meetings, one of the first meetings that I sit in is a budget forecasting meeting. Budget, though. That's perfect. It's budget made a good for me to slip. A budget forecasting meeting for the company. And each vice president in charge of the area is going around talking about our budget, how our employees are doing operations types of things, typical corporate stuff. I asked the question because I'm, How much money are we spending on wildlife conservation? Because when I interviewed at the company and all our branding and marketing messaging was that we're doing infectious disease research to protect wildlife and engage in conservation activities or something to that effect, and the room goes, quiet. And I'm looking at everyone and why is everyone staring into space or staring at me. And eventually, Peter Dasik looks at me with a maniacal laugh, says, We're not doing any conservation work. Is this like a nightmare? Yeah. And I'm just shocked. And I came directly from the National Laboratory System, Sandia National Labor. And I was trying to get away from that type of work.

I was actually excited to go work at a crunchy granola nonprofit organization where I was protecting wildlife because- You thought it was the Autobahn Society.

Yeah.

And as we were discussing earlier, we're both avid outdoorsmen. We love nature, that thing. And I thought I was going to get into more of that. I was excited like, hey, maybe I'll get a chance to have a trip out to the woods or the jungle and go protect some wildlife. And I hear this and I'm like, Okay. And I digest it. Of course, I don't say anything. It's my boss, the other executives. And then it drives more questions. What are we doing here? And so I sat in more executive meetings. I learned more, and I quickly learned that we were functioning as a Beltway bandit type of operation, meaning that we're trying to get large contracts and grants in our area, which is, in theory, predicting and forecasting infectious diseases. But really what we were doing was the simplest way of explaining is that we were running around the planet collecting infectious disease samples to build a bank or a library of infectious diseases, which was odd.

I'm sorry to keep laughing. This is so dark. I can't help it.

Well, it was odd from the standpoint. I was still looking at this as a scientist trying to figure out what we were doing. And there's not a ton of publication value in cataloging Infectious Diseases. You can get one simple publication from identifying a new or novel pathogen in a species, but it's a one and done thing. It doesn't really drive future research. So if you find you discover something, it's great. You found it, it's a publication, but that's not going to drive your next cycle of funding, because typically you want to be very strategic about this. Well, then if you start to look at the other portfolio of research at ECHO Alliance and what some of my peers, other vice presidents, in their areas of research, what they're up to and the places where our employees had joint employment or co-employment with in the work that they were doing, it became apparently obvious. We were aging and gain a function research and viral discovery to make new novel pathogens. I wanted nothing to do with it.

Well, Grand Canyon University is not like most American colleges. It focuses on the things that actually matter. It is not a rip off. It is the real thing. It's a private, affordable Christian University located in the heart of Phoenix, one of the largest universities in the country, actually. At Grand Canyon University, education is more than academics. It is about opportunity, the chance for every student to live out the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Rights are not given by the government. They were bestowed at birth, at conception by God. That's just a fact. And Grand University is not going to lie to your kids and claim otherwise. It tells the truth. You know you're thinking, a quality education is rare, so this probably costs a fortune. Colleges constantly jack up their costs. They probably do the same. Well, they don't actually. Gcu has maintained the same tuition for 17 straight years. They're not in education to get rich at the expense of students. The whole thing is actually about learning. How refreshing. With flexible online classes, hybrid learning options, GCU offers 340 academic programs. Students benefit from a collaborative learning environment, dedicated faculty, personalized support to help them achieve their goals.

The pursuit to serve is yours. Let it flourish. Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University, private, Christian, affordable. Gcu. Ed. You check your 401k, shake your head and wonder, is this really growing fast enough?

You've thought about trading, but the learning curve, the stress, and the time it takes, It's just not realistic. And the idea of losing money because of one bad decision, that's enough to keep most people on the sidelines. That's why trutrade. Io was created to give you a smarter, simpler way to trade. Trutrade's automated system takes a motion out of the equation using technology that trades for you, even while you're living your life. And here's what makes TruTrade different. When you download the TruTrade app and sign up, they'll guarantee to fund each of your trading accounts with $50,000 or more in trading capital and no service fees for 12 months. So you can start building passive income without risking your own money or spending years trying to learn the market. To take advantage of our offer and secure your $50,000 in funding, download the TruTrade app today to get started. That's T-R-U-T-R-A-D-E. Trutrade where technology earns for you. Investing involves risk, including loss of principle. Past results don't guarantee future performance. See terms and conditions.

Rather than predicting the threat to human and wildlife populations, you're actually just creating new deadly virus. Courses.

Exactly.

This is not what they advertised on LinkedIn.

No, it wasn't even LinkedIn. It was actually after their website, but you get it. The funny part is, if you look at the gain of function work and how they were even spinning it was that they were trying to even make the argument scientifically in the peer-reviewed literature that this gain of function work that they were doing, and this was through Dr. Ralph Barrack's laboratory at the University of North Carolina, that they could model and simulate pandemic potential from the gain of function work. And that in itself is a scientific fraud, in my opinion. It's not really possible to predict how a disease will spread in the community, either animals, humans, wildlife, from looking at the genetics and doing gain of function work. But that's the argument that they were effectively making back to the US government and other sponsors of our research research portfolio. In my book, I discussed this, but Dr. Anthony Fauci gets a lot of the blame for this gain of function work. And I wrote numerous whistleblower complaints. I think I wrote whistleblower complaints to every US agency involved, DOD, DHS, USDA, Fish and Wildlife. It's a long list, the CIA, which we can get to in a little bit.

So it's very clear that the research that we're doing had earlier origin than Dr. Anthony Fauci. And that's really USAID and maybe the State Department formulating a relationship with the Chinese at the Wuhan Institute of Vyrology And if you follow the proposals or scientific proposals and technical proposals which were submitted to the US government and trace that back, and I have all the original documents to prove this, it looks like the path for developing the gain of function partnership with the Chinese Bio-We weapons Lab began around 2010 or '11.

What was the purpose of that relationship?

Well, at the time, I had no idea. And this is specifically, I'm talking like 2015, 2016. Fast forward to today, I have much more information where I can... I thought about this in great detail and had I've had a number of other interviews, and I came to the conclusion that the real purpose, actually, of Eco Health Alliance doing this gain of function research with the Wuhan Institute of Virology was for us to collect intelligence on the Chinese Bio weapons Lab. And I had this very interesting moment when I worked at Eco Health Alliance, where it was around the holidays. I think it was in late 2015. I was working late to finish our project, and Dr. Dasik I was working on our project. Actually, as a coworker, working with Dr. Peter Dasik was fantastic. He was extremely hard worker, very diligent. He knew the publication game. He knew how to woo the people, the program sponsors that were funding our work. So professionally, I loved working with him in that aspect. Smart. Well, I would say cunning. I don't think he was much of a scientist. Actually, I think he's very weak as a scientist engineer.

But in terms of a project manager and a program manager, he was very, very strong.

Yes.

So we're leaving, we're locking up the office. We're in the vestibule up in the 15th floor of our building in New York City. And He goes, Andrew, do you mind if I ask you a question? It's my boss. Sure. Peter, go ahead. Well, somebody from the CIA approach me, and they're interested in the places we're working, the people we're working we're getting with in the data that we're collecting. Do you think it's a good idea that I speak with them? And he just said a lot of things, which just set off all my alarms because I came from the... I'm a product of the so-called deep state of the national security complex. I have held a top secret clearance. And here's my boss telling me that he had a side conversation with the CIA, and I have all these immediate thoughts. Was he really talking to someone from the CIA? Was it someone pretending to be from the CIA? Exactly. Because I'm like, does this guy know what he's dealing with? Exactly. I had to say something. I said, Peter, it never hurts to speak with him. There could be money in it. And it was, I think, a very honest direct assessment of what he had just told me.

We made small talk. We went down the elevator, and we went our separate ways. I walked home to my place up on the 45th Street, and that was the end of it. Well, over the next several weeks, in between meetings, meetings at the coffee cooler, I had to ask Peter, Hey, how's that thing with the CIA going? And he wouldn't say much, but it indicated that it was progressing. And about the third time I asked him, he was mom about it. He didn't want to talk about it anymore. And so I don't know if he was trying to tell me what he was actually up to because I was from that world, or if he just really wanted my honest opinion, I have no idea. But now, fast forward to SARS-CoV-2, COVID, and everything that's happened, it's very clear to me that Peter Dasik was probably used as a CIA asset to obtain access to that laboratory in the way that we obtained access to that laboratory. Because mind you, it was well known in my circles, going all the way back to when I was a PhD student, that this laboratory in Wuhan was essentially the Chinese military's biowe weapons laboratory.

So how would you get access to They're not going to allow Westerners to just come in. And where Senator Rand Paul and a number of other congressmen have been completely wrong about this in opinion, I've told them so in writing, is that this wasn't the US government giving the Chinese $400,000 to conduct gain of function research. I mean, just think about how preposterous this is.

Yeah, they don't need the money.

They don't need the money. So what do they need? What do you I think.

Technical expertise, I would think.

And what else? The actual technology. So the technical expertise and the technology. So the trade that was made is that we were actually transferring advanced biotechnology from Dr. Ralph Barrick's laboratory to the Chinese for access to the laboratory so we could collect intelligence on it. And some of that might fall under the umbrella of scientific diplomacy, which I'm actually a huge proponent of, but not with the Chinese. And that's where I- So I I don't know.

I have no way to evaluate what you're saying, but except against things I've seen in other areas. And that is exactly how the world works, what you just said. That's how things really are, right? Is the US government makes deals with people that they're not really on their... Whoever it is, Gadhafi, Maduro. I mean, there's a long-standing and ongoing relationships with a lot of people I think the public would be shocked to know we're in relationship with, but the motive is always the same. The What should I get, the more until I can gather.

I think your assessment of the global scheme of how the US government operates and formulates relationships is accurate. Oh, I've seen it. I think a lot of that is doctrine. They want to try to obtain close relationships with the highest-ranking government officials possible. Sometimes the methods and how they do that are questionable.

But it's always the same. I mean, you'll be... This has literally happened the other day. You're talking to a well-informed person, and they're like, Oh, yeah, I knew so and so. It's like, what? How in the world were you connected to that person who's bad? The human equivalent of the Wuhan Institute of Urology. And it's like, well, because that person is someone who has a lot of information that we want.

Oh, absolutely. And I've met a number of intel agents from various agencies that show me pictures of the very high profile evil people that they're working with. Of course. And I I actually have no problem with that.

Omar Gadhafi was working with Mossad and CIA.

Yeah.

Right. So of course, and I'm not even attacking anybody at all. I'm just saying that is the actual truth of the world that I have seen personally.

I agree with your truth. I think the more questionable part is, why are we giving advanced technologies to our enemies? And where this really gets strange is that back when I did work at ECHO Alliance, I did object to working with the Chinese. So the next phase of Predict Funding is coming along, Predict Two.

Okay. So Predict is the program that you described earlier that supposedly monitors global wildlife populations to get a head start on preparing for a pandemic.

Well, to predict and forecast it. Predict and forecast. So maybe get a head start could be a more accurate framing or at least have an assessment of what circuiting the area. That's probably a fair characterization. But Predict Two, they're basically going to continue this boon dogel operation and expand the portfolio to research with China. And once I was promoted to vice president, they put me on to the predict program at my own request because it was the sexy thing that Equal Health Alliance was doing. And I wanted to be a part of it because you get my name on more publications, more notoriety. And they wanted to make me a country coordinator. And I ended up being one of the country coordinators for Sudan, and then also Jordan, and then Peter Dasik floated that I help him with China. And when that came up in the meeting, I said, I want nothing to do with this. Still, my top secret clearance is a good standing. I object to us doing the work with China. And I actually said in the meeting, Are you the slightest bit concerned that the Chinese are going to do something nefarious?

Like, they're going to steal our intellectual property. The Chinese have a pattern of lie, cheat, and steal. So why do we want to do this work with China? And I said that in the executive meeting, and I was trying to protect the company, more so even just the national security risk side. I was trying to protect the company. And Peter gave a very political response that the work with China is very important, and this relationship that we have with the Chinese is very important. Really, I think the only thing that was important to Peter is the fact that this Chinese at least, cut out of the bigger contract was a lot of money. Exactly. And he had already been flipped as an intel asset to collect the Chinese in the lab. This wasn't going away, and this was all the window dressing to make it look legitimate.

We're starting to say it, but This is not a very safe country. Walk through Oakland or Philadelphia. Yeah, good luck. Most people, when they think about this, want to carry a firearms, and a lot of us do. The problem is there can be massive consequences for that. Ask Kyle Rittenhouse. Kyle Rittenhouse got off in the end, but he was innocent from the first moment. It was obvious on video, and he was facing life in prison anyway. That's what the anti-gun movement will do. They'll throw you in prison for defending your sofa the firearms. That's why a lot of Americans are turning to Berna. It's a proudly American company. Berna makes self-defense launchers that hundreds of law enforcement departments trust. They've sold over 600,000 pistols, mostly to private citizens who refuse to be empty-handed. These pistols, and I have one, fire rock hard kinetic rounds or tear gas rounds in peppered projectiles, and they stop a threat from up to 60 feet away. There are no background checks, there are no waiting periods. Berna can ship it directly to your door. You can't be arrested for defending yourself with a Berna pistol. Visit bernabyrna. Com or your local sportsman's warehouse to get your stay.

Berna. Com. Yeah, again, I don't have any background information, so you could tell me anything, but Everything you're saying sounds right to me, just based on what I have seen. Can I just back up a tiny bit and ask some practical questions about what ECHO Health Alliance was doing? So you said before you got to the portion where they were acting as an intel asset, which sounds right, you said they were compiling, collecting a library of viruses from around the world. How does that work? How do you collect a virus in Sudan, for example, any country? How do you do that?

Sure. I guess, my In my mind, it's very straightforward, but typically, first, you form a relationship with the diplomatic mission, so the embassy, the Council of the United States. They might refer you to either hospitals, professors, other academics or company-In country. In country, or maybe you already have those relationships from past work that you've done. You then go on a trip to that country and you go do an assessment of their laboratories. You collect information, try to gage, these people have the capability, do you know what they're doing? Are they going to spend our money wisely. It's a business trip, and it's very business-focused, and you're assessing their capabilities. Then once you have a good feeling with their capabilities, you begin the contracting process with that foreign entity. And if you're doing everything by the book, you run these people go through US government systems to make sure they're not terrorists or evil people. So we're not giving money to terrorists. That didn't happen at Equal Health Alliance. It did not happen. It did not happen. I found out about that after the fact as well. But we tried to figure out who these people are, and then if they're capable Well, oftentimes it's universities, either the Ag school or at a foreign university, the veterinary school or Human Medical Center.

Then we formulate the contract, we send them the cash, and then they would either go out and collect the samples or we would travel or to have our personnel travel to go collect the sample. So if we're talking about bats, it depends on what species you're dealing with. If you're dealing with bats, you set nets or traps in a bat cave, for example. You catch the bat in the net, and then you go out there in your personal protective equipment, and you take fecal swaps, blood, saliva from the animal, and then you then package that so the DNA will not be degrade and transport back to the laboratory. And then depending- Where's the laboratory? Well, it depends on what country you're working in. So every country we had different agreements with contractually about who owned the samples, who would store the samples. And the other thing that What's happening in the background here is that technology is advancing. So at one time in this type of research, you actually had to have the physical sample. Today, we're at a point, you no longer have to have the physical sample. You can actually send the DNA or RNA code digitally to somebody else, and they can recreate it.

So this field has advanced tremendously over 10 years, and this is taking place as advancement while we're doing this work. Oftentimes, the samples then were physically transported back to the United States or mailed or shipped.

You can mail a deadly bat virus from a third-world country to the US?

Well, there's a manual from the CDC and USDA and HHS of how to transport samples. So yes, there are rules and process of how you can-So almost all of that mail goes on commercial airlineers? Typically, and there's really not a whole lot of risk from a collected sample First of all, you don't even know at this point whether there's a new deadly virus present in the sample.

In the batshit or saliva.

In the batshit, the saliva, you have no clue. Once it gets back to the United States, then it goes to, at least at ECHO compliance, it would go to in Lipkins Laboratory at Columbia University, where he was a specialist in... He's a pretty well known viral epidemiologist with really good lab chops. And another doctor who worked with us named Simon Anthony would work with him to first identify and isolate new viruses or novel viruses. So that's where it typically took place. Then the mechanics of this or operations of this, that information or sample would be sent to another laboratory like Ralph Barrack's Laboratory, where he would to continue the work. Down at Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill and do the gain of function work.

It's just, can I just approach this from an autistic perspective? So what you're saying is there are people around the world in bat caves in some far away country sending potentially novel and dangerous viruses to New York City. Like all the time, and people are not even aware of this.

There's a huge, I wouldn't say huge, but I mean, a non-trivial amount of these types of samples being shipped around the world globally. And if they're properly contained and packaged, it's really not that much of a risk. Actually, Dr. Ralph Barrack developed some of these methods of how to send what's called a chimeric virus on a sheet of paper, an envelope, which is low risk. The bigger risk becomes when you start to clone or replicate that agent at scale. Human medicine, public health, epidemiology, transmission risk. Now, you look at this, you have to have a substantial quantity of A virus, which is a substance mixed in the air or be exposed to it to become infected with it because you have an immune system that works. Okay, and sometimes you get exposed to these things. You don't even know it because your immune system fights it off. Right. So I think sometimes the risk is were blown in the fear around transporting samples. I think most of the time that's actually pretty low risk. There's been a series of transporting accidents, which occurred from 2008 to 2012 or '14. I want to say, which actually led to the ban or partial ban on gain of function research.

What accidents?

One of the high-profile ones was that I think it was Bacillus anthraxis was being shipped from one of our US government BSL Four laboratories under CDC control to another laboratory, and it went missing, and they found it sitting in the corner.

Some porch pirate stole it.

No, it wasn't a porch pirate, but they found it someplace, and it wasn't properly secured or in completely off the-Yeah, we live in a world with like, chernobyl and misdiagnoses.

I mean, I believe in science. I think there are a lot of, rigorous responsible scientists, but people make mistakes. I mean, and over time and with scale, mistakes will happen, right?

Well, and we actually dealt with this type of low probability, high consequence threat risk analysis all the time at San Diego National Labor. And the big issue is what you just brought up, the human in the loop. Usually the engineered systems, you can engineer those precisely to account for whatever probability or consequence or risk. But it's always the human making a decision or behavior, action involved in the system that makes a mistake, which causes some catastrophic failure.

Well, yeah. I mean, yeah. Okay, I just was just interested. So then you say that the ECHO Health Alliance was compiling a library of these viruses? They'd be stored in one place?

Well, yes. They had a digital library at ECHO Health Alliance. And then there's other systems that the US, or I should say, not only the United States, but the global virologist community maintain of genetic information on viruses.

But the actual virus as the living organisms, were they stored anywhere?

Typically, we were buying negative ADC Cintegrate freezers as fast as we could, or as many as we could afford in storing those at Columbia University and other laboratories where these things go in the freezer and set. The one nice thing is if the freezer does fail, it usually destroys all the sample on the inside because they do have to be maintained cold.

We thought this through when we started this podcast a year ago, and we decided we're never advertising anything that we or people on our staff don't use, period. We're only partnering with companies that we agree with and endorse actually in our personal lives. We want to announce a new partnership with a survival company we trust most, Last Country Supply is the name of our collaboration. Last Country Supply. I have a big surplus of survival food from that great company. If you get a bucket of food with a 25-year shelf life, 2,000 calories a day, potatoes, rice, bread, drinks, you feel a lot better. Let's say there's an EMP attack or civil disturbance, you don't know what could happen in the future. You are prepared and you are protecting your family with Last Country Supply products. So head to lastcountrysupply. Com to shop for our collection, bulk up now. There is no scenario where you will regret being prepared. What's the security like at a lab like that?

In my opinion, I tend to think that it's laughable. I've actually- laughable? Laughable at most university laboratories. If you were to do a red team or penetration test and me coming on the national security being a biosecurity biosafety expert, you could get into most university laboratories. I heard arguments from other scientists who work in these laboratories. Well, We have good physical security. We have card scanners. We have this- Good physical.

I'd love to know what that actually, what those guys actually look like.

Who? The scientists?

The good physical security.

I mean, if you are a motivated attacker and you're well and you can get into one of these laboratories. It would not be overly difficult. Now, has this improved and has this been changed? Or all the laboratory is the same? I mean, I think many of the BSL three or four, which are the higher level or highest level laboratories in the United States, now have pretty good or strong physical security. But when you look at what's actually happened in terms of accidents and lab leaks throughout history, in recent history, I mean, speaking of this Ralph Barrack in his laboratory, he's had a series of leaks at his laboratory over years, where people, their employees have gotten sick. And typically, it's one of the people working in the laboratory is accidentally exposed because it's a virus that you can't see. And the way that disease incubates inside a person and how the bioevent timeline is, we call it the amount of time it takes for a person to become sick, they leave the lab and then they become sick at home. And then that's when the disease becomes a transmission risk to the community. So that's just the very nature of how people behave, how people work in the laboratory, how human biology and physiology works.

I mean, this is the nature of the beast. And it's very difficult to prevent those types of risks I guess, to the community and the greater population.

No, this is why we have Lyme disease, which I got. So yes, no, I'm very aware of that, and I think everyone's aware of that. So with that in mind, gain of function is inherently dangerous, correct?

I've always been against it. It actually divides the scientific community or it used to pre-COVID. I think there's probably more scientists and experts against gain of function. It seems like certainly the general population is against it. Not all gain of function technology is bad. For For example, insulin is made from a form of gain of function, and there are many diabetic people, and they require insulin. Now, if we're talking about gain of function research on pathogens which have pandemic potential, it's a no-brainer. It's a stupid idea, and this is why it splits the scientific community. So one camp says, There's no use to this. I don't understand why we're doing it in the first place, therefore we shouldn't do it. The other camp argues, Well, if we can predict how these viruses will mutate, then we can develop countermeasures, vaccines or drugs to counter the threat before it emerges. And that opinion, and I've always held this belief, that the people who have that opinion are wrong. And the reason why they're wrong is that you have to be like God, and you have to know and be able to predict how something will genetically evolve over time.

And if you look back through human history, it's always humans trying to correct nature, which have failed. The introduction of the Brown snake in Guam. I mean, there's all these things where they've... That was a hitchhiker scenario, but where they try to introduce some predator to eliminate some bad past. You see this repeatedly throughout history that we can correct a complex system, which is nature.

That's what geo engineering is. And that's why it's destroying our forests because they're spraying particulate matter into the air to counteract global warming. And they're not God, so they're not doing it right.

And it's-well, that's interesting that you bring that up. So I used to work with the geoengineers, and I wonder how much scale it's actually occurring. And people talk about contrails, and that being geoengineering, it's not. And most of these stations are ground-based. But it's very expensive. From a scientific and engineering perspective. If you were going to launch a large scale geo engineering project that was Earth-based, it takes a lot of material, and the material costs a lot of money. So I don't think it's happening at a largest scale that people believe. The more effective geo engineering technology exists are actually satellite deployed systems, which act as solar shades. And I don't think any of that exists, but we are putting more things into space all the time. And a lot of this is either not classified or secret, but it's not exactly visible either. So who knows what people are shooting at this face.

Exactly. And there's a massive disinformation campaign against anyone who asked questions about it, which tells you it is real.

Yes.

Like QAPs. But Anyway, without getting into all of that stuff. So you are asked like, Hey, Dr. Huff, would you like to go to China? And you say no.

I say no. And it's two reasons, one, to protect the company, and also because I wanted to maintain my security clearance and good standing. It's not that you can't have foreign relationships, but it becomes more complicated for your reinvestigation in the future if you have relationships with a country like China. From From a national security perspective, I've always been against what the Chinese have been doing, and that's lying, cheating, and stealing from us. We never get anything out of the relationship, it seems. It's been a very abusive one-way relationship from the Chinese. I knew this going back to my military days. I had actually been invited to do other collaborative work with the Chinese at other institutions, places I've worked, tied to national security. I always stayed away from it because I never saw any benefit to it. Well, if the government wants to If the US government wants to fund this or this entity wants to fund it, that's fine. I can protest by just not being a part of it.

So you leave ECHO Health Alliance after a few years, then COVID happens.

Yes. And when it happens, everyone thinks I'm the crazy one. And how this actually transpires is I was working at Jules Labs, the eSecret Company, as a Senior Director of Population Health, living in the Bay Area. And because of what I did for a living in my expertise, I catch wind of this virus spreading around the planet. It was very obvious that people on the West Coast were becoming sick in, I want to say late November, December 2019. Another really weird thing happens. So I'm making more money than I've ever made in my life at this company, and I was very grateful for that. I was able to pay off all my debt. But I received a phone call from a woman by the name of Dr. Amy Jenkins, who works at ARPA-H now. I think she's the Deputy Director there, I can't remember her title is. But I know Amy from years back. I actually met her while I was a PhD student at the University of Minnesota at a DH Department of Home and Security Center of Excellence. She had shown up to a few meetings of ours. She was working with the Department of Defense at that time and the intelligence services.

And she's a great scientist and very friendly relationship with her. And she contacts me and she informs me that she's now working with Darpa and offers me a position as a program manager in the Biological Programs Directorate. And I thought it was odd that she had contacted me on my brand new San Francisco area cell phone. So I had a new phone number because they were located and I wanted San Francisco area code. I didn't think too much of it. And I couldn't figure out the why she wanted me come be the director of this biological program. I had been trying to get away from national security intelligence type work for several years, and I kept on getting dragged back into it, it seemed. And I said, thanks, Amy. I'm not really interested in this right now. I'm making a lot of money. This pays far more than what Darpa can pay me. I want to keep what I'm doing. She's like, well, go home and speak with your wife, Emily. If you change your mind, we'd like to both bring you on. We'll find a home for Emily, too, because she's scientist. And that's very common in the scientific community, the two body problem.

And go home, speak with Emily about it, and give me a call back tomorrow and let me know what you think. Said, okay, Amy, I'll do that. So went home, had a conversation with my wife, Hey, do you want to move back to the Beltway or I moved to DC to have fed jobs and go work in that environment. My wife had previously worked at USDA, and she didn't want to go back to it. And I call up Amy the next day, Thank you for contacting me. At one point, this was In my career, this was actually my dream job to be running a... Have a blank check from the Department of Defense to go develop all the coolest biotechnology world. I mean, seriously, I had dreamed of that job at one point in my life. I didn't want it. Yeah. And so I told her no. And she's like, well, if you change your mind in the next few weeks, we'd really like to have you. You call me anytime. And that was it. Well, okay, that phone call took place late September, early October 2019. Fast forward today with what we know is that the DarPA had held a contest, or I want to say not so much a contest, but put out a RFP, a Request for Proposals, related to something called pre-empt, which was Preventing Emerging Infectious Diseases Threats.

And one of the proposals was something called diffuse from my former employer called Eco-Health Alliance, which was basically the recipe for SARS-CoV-2, which was done in partnership with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. So I'm just hopping around here, but the reason why this is important is now I believe that Darpa was actually trying to recruit me back into the program. So I want to have done any of the things that I've done over the last four years, essentially.

Which is tell the truth in public.

Tell the truth in public about what the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is. But going back on your timeline here. So I had limited information back then, and I knew a pandemic was coming. So I told my wife, we need to get the heck out of the Bay Area as fast as possible. This could go off the rails. I actually believed the information I was seeing, which I think was potentially targeted at me, that this disease would be much more severe than it was. I'm not saying that it wasn't a severe disease. I mean, it wasn't as bad as they're making it seem.

I believed it, too.

Oh, absolutely. Well, they had portrayed it, though, that something in epidemiology-You mean in January, February of 2020?

Correct. Oh, yeah.

So they're painting a portrayal. And scientifically, in epidemiology, we have something called the case fatality rate. So of how many people get sick? How many die? This thing is going to kill everyone. Like, 80, 90 % of the population could die from this disease. That's how they were portraying this. It turns out that that number was much lower. And somewhere in the percentage category, not Not the 70, 80 or 90 %. So I went real quick from thinking that this was going to be the thing that could cripple society to being, I'm not wearing a mask in public. But my behavior and action in early 2020, the first weeks, I start looking for a place in a remote area. So I'm considering Alaska, Maine, Northern Maine, Western Wyoming, or the UP of Michigan. My search criteria based on what I knew as an expert, you want to have access to an airport, transportation, high-speed Internet, an hour drive from a major city center that's not too populated, because if it's going to end the planet, it's going to kill everyone. You want distance from other people to break transmission cycles. At least you can isolate yourself.

So I bought a year supply worth of MREs. I start stockpiling other things, some ammunition, make a plan. And my wife and I land in the UP of Michigan. Everyone thought I was crazy for doing this. And next thing you know, everybody wants to come visit me during the lockdowns. They said you were right about everything. I know.

I live this, too. Yes.

In the back of my mind, though, I'm thinking about constantly that And I know that EcoHealth Alliance had been engaged in this gain of function work at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And I'm like, a back coronavirus emerging in Wuhan? And I'm watching these watching the news and the TV through 2020, and they're like, oh, it was a pangolin, or it was the wet market. And I'm arguing on social media that that's just not possible. That doesn't make sense from an emerging infectious disease standpoint, because a wet market, in the specific wet market in China is a seafood market. That's why it's called a wet market. Yes. But Western Americans- It's not for mammals. It's for creatures from the sea. People in the United States have a very myopic view of the world, typically. Oh, I I'm sitting here arguing. I'm like, this is a fish market. And in fact, I'm looking at the pictures of it and my assessment is like, this is the place I'd go buy groceries rather than New York City, a very nice place. So I'm like, none of this is adding up. And you're watching the story evolve. And next thing you know, my former boss, Dr. Peter Dasik, has put on the committee that's sent over by the World Health Organization to go investigate the origin of the disease.

And this is getting weirder and weirder and weirder, and I know all the players involved. I had met and worked with not Dr. Anthony Fauci himself, but his Deputy Dr. Morins. I had been out to dinner with him. I knew all the players in this big thing. I had been groom since I was a PhD student to be a Dr. Anthony Fauci replacement or that type of person. So I knew all the people in the system and working on these things, and the program managers, the officers, the different branches of the government. So I'm watching this all play out, and I just can't believe it. And it's the thing where I'm yelling at my computer on your screen in private. They put fucking Dr. Dask in charge of investigating the origin. He's probably the one that caused it. And little did I know that this was all part of the psychological operation in cover up. And I just started becoming more calloused, entrenched about really going on.

Can you explain that a little bit? What does that mean? Why would putting the guy who had a hand in the creation of the virus in charge of investigating the origin of the virus be part of a PSYOP?

To give the perception that it's an independent person that's well-trusted within the wildlife community and the scientific community that we know what you're doing and can trust what we're saying. Because if you look at how the psychological operation was waged, and I'm not just saying the US government, but multiple entities, the pharmaceutical industry, the big companies that back all these different things, special interest, just generally. You take the guy who's responsible, you put him in charge in the investigation. You know that he's not going to tie it back to himself, but he's already been branding himself for years and decades as being a person that cares a crunchy NGO person. And he has their relationships in wealthy communities on the West Coast and East Coast, the elite, to convince them that this is a naturally emerging disease from the wet market. So he's already the point man. He's already sold everyone all this bullshit related to we're going to go and forecast pandemics. And really, he's the guy who caused one.

It's really... Yeah. Thank you for saying. I just wanted you to explain that a little more fully. I've, again, lived this, seen it. And it is effective because it's so shocking that someone would do that. It's so brazen. Reason, the chutzpa required to do something like that. You take not just some random guy, but the guy who's responsible, and you start telling everyone he's the savior. Wow, man. The human brain, a normal person is bewildered by that, is thrown off balance by that.

Well, at least in my life, and we were discussing this a little bit at breakfast, the more you see of this trickery, the more that you're exposed to, and they actually talk about this in the psychological research. Oftentimes, the more aware you become of a phenomenon, the more you see it. And then once you start saying it, you can't stop seeing it. I know. And that's how they say people become conspiracy theorists because they see the conspiracy theorists.

Well, that's why very few young people, I think this is changing fast, but my whole life, young people always bought the story. Then you meet guys in their 70s, particularly people who'd work for the government. I've known a lot of those who would get more conspiracy minded as they aged. Have you ever noticed this?

Oh, absolutely. Yeah.

That's just- Why is that?

Well, experience. Exactly. Experience in living life. I do that now. I'm 43, and you see someone in their 20s or 19, they have a very idealistic view of the world. I used to be one of those people.

Tell me about it. I made it to my late 30s with that, mid-30s. But anyway, wow, that's wild. So you're sitting up at the UP with your scientist wife watching this stuff on CNN going, you must be going bonkers watching this.

Well, internally, and I was working on a startup company, and I was distracted by other things. And because I was in the UP, this was only via social media or the news. So I'm pretty detached from it. What happens is in late 2021, the operation trends focused towards me because now I'm being, I think, viewed as a threat based on some of the things I put on LinkedIn at the time and other social media posts that I needed to be contained in some way.

And what things were you saying?

So it was really Dr. Malone and I and a few other people who were trying to remain anonymous. I know who they are. We're just telling the truth. So first of all, around the disease, that this is not a natural really emerging pathogen. And I could tell that it was not based on a number of facts, how this disease was spreading, the type of agent it was, the coincidence that we had been funding this exact type of work. And I had the original documents at this laboratory. It was just that their story and how the people involved were saying things about the disease, just which weren't true. And how, specifically, how this type of disease would emerge. I mean, that's what my PhD is in. I mean, I've worked in this field, and I knew that these people knew that they were lying because these people were qualified experts as well. So why are these people lying about how this disease would emerge? Great question. And so it drives more questions, right? Every time you have something that's weird, it doesn't fit the pattern or isn't the thing that it's supposed to be, you ask more questions.

And as this, the timeline of COVID is is happening or occurring. So we're going through the lockdowns. They're trying to get the vaccine operation warps speed. They're trying to do all these things. That's all distracting everyone from the origin question and the people involved in the origin discussions and the psychological operation of it was that, in my opinion, is that they were actually trying to get society bogged down in the technical details. They have a very sophisticated scientific jargon, which very few people were qualified to understand or argue or debate, and then label it as those people were the only people were qualified experts to be able to debate, so therefore there was no debate allowed. And I wasn't buying. I wasn't fucking having it. It was driving me nuts.

Because you were a qualified expert, so you didn't have to buy it.

Well, and I'm highly competitive, and those so-called qualified experts, I thought I was better than them. Yeah. And I look at where we're sitting today. I'm sitting here in this chair, speaking with you, telling you the truth. And I think my argument, the psychological operation I waged back against the population via social media and other channels and how I did, has been completely successful. From day one, I had been saying that this was a laboratory leak. And you look at most of the population today, everyone, I think globally, believes that it came out of the laboratory. I think people are tied to it are still trying to make the panglin or a natural emergency.

It's funny, I went on the ECHO Health Alliance. I think ECHO Health Alliance is gone or gone now. It's defunct, yeah. It's defunct, yeah. But on their website, which still exists, I looked at it last night, They have an attack on you, of course, lacking all specifics. You're familiar with all this. But on it, they say Dr. Huff makes the totally unsubstantiated claim that this virus escape from a lab when we know in the scientific consensus states that it emerged naturally out of an animal population.

Well, the- So when they wrote that, they knew that wasn't true. Oh, absolutely. And they put out other weird smear tactics, and they had worked with the media to smear me, the best, my favorite smear. So the day that my publication came out, there was a story, I think that ran in the New York Post, and it claimed that I was wrong, that I had never worked in the Wuhan lab. Well, that was attributionary. I never had claimed that I worked- No, in fact, you just explained you didn't want to work in China. Correct. But that's how they were trying to scope the argument that I was a liar.

The New York Post. That would not surprise me. And I just want to say for the record, The New York Post is one of the most dishonest publications in the world and is very often used by the intel agencies and other bad actors to lie to the public. It's also hilarious. It's a great newspaper in certain ways. And so it's the same with Daily Mail, exactly the same. And they lull you into believing them because they've got a sense of humor and they cover great stories and they're vaguely right wing. But actually, it's a vector for disinformation and for lying on behalf of the intel agencies. That's just what it is.

That's most mainstream media, I think.

It is. But I think the New York Post and Daily Mail are at Wall Street Journal, also Fox News, for sure. But they're more sinister because people believe them because, hey, it's Fox News. It's the Daily Mail. It's the New York Post, especially the New York Post. Every headless body and topless bar, man, it's the coolest paper in the world. They wouldn't do that. They do it constantly.

I agree. What do you do about it when you're the little man? I don't know.

You tell the truth about it. That's all you can do. But all those companies are failing, and they'll all be gone soon, and I won't lament their passing. But anyway, so tell me what they did to contain control and punish you once you started telling the truth.

So in late... The timeline is starting to get a little foggy. This has been an ongoing saga. I think it was in late 2021 or mid to late 2021. I was contacted by some journalists. Journalists started trying contact me and ask me questions because they're probably wondering, who's this tough guy? Does he know what he's talking about? They're probably trying to frame me as a crazy. Miranda Devine contacts me, pretty prominent journalist, and asks me on the telephone where she should look for more records related to this gain of function research. And because I had worked in this field for a year and knew all the players, I'm like, I don't know. My gut tells me I'd go look at Darpa. And I believe that conversation was being listened into. I believe they were already watching me, obviously, going back into October 2019. That's when it triggers something within the Intel community where I had found out now, second-hand, that there was a false allegation that someone had leaked classified information to me. Nobody's ever leaked classified information to me because, one, they don't typically target the person that was leaked to. They target the leaker, okay?

And I would be arrested and be in jail if any of that were true. And when I told that to Miranda Devine, this is based on my expert opinion, I knew the people who were finding the work preempt all these different things. I knew the players. So you go look at the funding sources to identify proposals or things that have been submitted. And I don't know if this is related or not, but a week or two after I had that conversation, Major Murphy from the US Marine Corps puts out a whistleblower disclosure that There's this thing called the Diffuse proposal, which is basically the recipe of how to make SARS-CoV-2. And it was done in partnership with the Chinese and a number of scientists in the US. And the primary sponsor, the primary company engaging this work was Ecolethe Alliance. So every name on the Diffuse proposal, I know those people or I know of them and what work they were doing. And everyone discredited this Diffuse proposal because this is not a real proposal. This looks like a joke. It's two pages. It looks very half-hazard. I started making the argument to people, no, this is very real.

Darpa does business differently than other government agencies. They use this thing called Highmire's Catechism. You have to answer a series of questions, proposals They only want a page or two. They don't want a big NIH proposal, which is very technical, could be full length of 100, 200 pages of material. They only typically want a one or two-page proposal. I tell people, this is how Darpa does business. But since nobody in the real world knows how the business works in these areas.

Not a lot of people you run into at Starbucks have done business with Darpa.

Exactly. And that's how they then start the psychological operation around the diffuse proposal.

For those who aren't familiar, we just tell viewers what Darpa is.

Yeah. So Darpa is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. It used to be ARPA before they added the D before it. So Advanced Research Projects Agency. It's actually made most of the coolest technology that we have. Or one of the companies these are entities that's federally funded that has the internet. So everything on the internet was developed by ARPA, ARPA Net. And if you are a tech nerd like me and you start digging down the DNS queries of how you search for information, you dig down, you start pulling up the tables of information, eventually you get to something that says ARPA Net, in every communication that we do. So they make the most sophisticated stuff in the world.

So it's a Pentagon-funded research lab, basically?

Yes. Well, not necessarily just a research lab. It I'd call it more of it. It covers a program area or series of program areas, where some of the research is done by private contractors, FFRDCs, basically anybody who can do the work. And they fund high risk, high value, scientific R&D on short timelines. So you don't receive 10 years of funding. The Department of Defense, rightfully so, is what capability will this give us within a year or two, three years? They have a short horizon. It's no nonsense, and they want results, and they achieve them.

Interesting. That's a great description from someone who's worked with them. So anyway, you have this conversation with Miranda Devine, and you now believe that conversation was monitored. And what happens next?

Well, then I start because my profile is increasing, and I'm starting to be actually followed by people out in the UP when I go to the grocery store. Very Very strange, right?

If you- U. P. Is the upper peninsula of Michigan. It's not actually near the state of Michigan, really. It's a geographic anomaly, but it is very lightly populated and extremely rural. It's one of the most rural places east of the Mississippi, if this is a fair description.

Yes, it's actually the most rural place in the Lower 48. In the Lower 48? Yes, by population density.

So when you're getting followed in the U. P, you know it.

Oh, absolutely. I The house, the pandemic prepper house that we purchased, it's 180 acres. It's completely off-grid. Our driveway is a mile long, and it's basically like a moat. There's a natural dense swamp on all four sides because the driveway is an old railroad grade. Oh, cool. Yeah. So it's very isolated. I joke, I could throw a hand grenade off my step and nobody would notice. Because there are mines in the air, there's blasting and stuff going on, nobody would care. So that's where I live. So when you go to the gas station or you go into town, a 40-minute drive, and you have someone follow you, have a couple of vehicles follow you, it's very strange. And I get on, it was Twitter then before action. It's hilarious. My profile is becoming elevated. So one of the first people to get in contact with me was Brett Weinstein, Dr. Weinstein. Another, they start reaching out to me. So the people who were outspoken and skeptics around all that thing start contacting me. And I have a four hour conversation with Brett Weinstein, and I walk them through the whole thing, even through the vaccine technology, and I think how it will cause cancer.

And look today where we are, these mRNA vaccines are causing cancer. So anyways, I have this great conversation, and all of a sudden, I feel that I can sense the pressure being applied and mounted. From being followed, as weird as that is. And because I'm a former top secret clearance holder, I decided to go report this to the FBI. So I go to my local FBI field office and I say, I'm Dr. Andrew Huff. I'm a former top secret clearance holder that work in this environment. I'm being tailed because you're supposed to. You sign a document saying that if you report any... If you have any strange behavior the rest of your life of being tailed or hacking surveillance, report it to the FBI. So I did. My wife and I go in there. They seem like they're taking it very seriously. And I then actually hire a private investigator to then cross-check what the FBI is doing. And there's a vehicle that's following me, and I report it to the FBI. The FBI tells me it's nothing. The private eye tells me that vehicle is registered to the Secretary of State in Michigan, and that's how they have undercover vehicles.

What?

Yes.

So- That's how the FBI is undercover vehicles?

That or any other undercover entity. So some federal entity- But government agency. Government agency could be the state police, the Sheriff's Department. I now know for a fact that it was the state police, my Sheriff's Department, Marquette County, and the FBI all working together in hindsight, and probably also with the Department of Defense and the CIA, which is more difficult to prove, but you can see ties and tendrils into that. So that aside, so I'm being followed. They're listening to my communications. All this is easy to detect. If you're a person who worked in intelligence and defense, you know how they operate. And so I just started collecting evidence of all the terrible crap. And my devices were getting hacked weekly. I mean, I'd have to wipe the operating systems, reinstall. And it's this cat and mouse game as technology is involving. And I'm an engineer, so I just start increasing my security all the time. And the sad reality is with consumer-grade electronics that you buy from Amazon or wherever you get them these days. It's difficult to defend it against that advanced persistent threat. So basically, I spend a lot of time doing network engineering and restoring programs and software, because once I get to the point where I'm writing my book, the hacks intensify.

And it's definitely coming from the government, probably the pharmaceutical industry or other entities and organizations. And I I tried to investigate myself, the source of those hacks. Actually, no, you follow the IP addresses of their VPN that they backdoor in your system, you can find out who the attacker is. So I do this, and I sit on it, and it's gotten to the point where I'm ready to file a large federal lawsuit against the federal government, Cash Patel, who was supposedly my ally for $50 million, because I've identified the FBI agents and everyone involved all the way to the top. I basically ran a counterintelligence operation back against the US government with my training and collected the evidence to prove it. I even have fingerprints that I was obtained in my house of people who broke into my house. They tased my dog. What? Yeah, they tased my dog during one of the break-ins. What else did they do? Actually? Yeah, actually. How do you know that? I mean, it leaves a big mark and a burn on the dog's neck. It was hiding, cowering in the counter. It changed one of my bird dogs.

So this dog was actually one of the more- German Shorher pointer? Yeah, so large female, about 70 pounds, large for that breed.

They attacked your dog? Yeah.

Okay, That's when... Yeah, they tased the dog, and it changed her behavior. She became more timid. She actually used to be aggressive for a GSP. And so anyways, they tased my dog. They tampered with my vehicles on numerous occasions. And this just didn't happen in the UP. This happen when I go other places. So if I travel for work, say I'd go to Wisconsin, Green Bay, California, they'd tamper with my vehicles there and do really silly stuff, like psychologically. So they might just like, buckle your seat belt before you... So you leave the car and then you come back to your car and everything's all skewed and they mess with stuff in it. So I mean, it was more of a psychological operation, not like trying to kill me, but they were trying to apply all the pressure that they could to make my life miserable. I have times, periods where my credit creds might not work. You show up to a gas station, try to run it to the pump, it won't be at work. So is that the bank screwing with me, the payment system? I had the controls on my vehicle. I don't want to say what type of car I have on your show, but a newer vehicle that has automated driving, like our assisted driving capabilities that had been taken over at low speed where I couldn't control it.

And now I'm in the mind, I'm like, Oh, gee, should we self-driving cars. And they would actually always-Let me answer that question.

No. It's the end of human autonomy. You should have 1987 Chevrolet Silverados with the five-speed manual transmission.

You'll have to take me for a ride later.

That's what I drive. Okay. Sorry.

No, and I thought about that. And so it's always this battle whether or not we should have these technologies. And here's the thing I wanted to point out. They didn't do these things when I was driving in high speed. It happened at the same place in my driveway, systematically, where they were doing it to mess with me at a low speed. And I actually brought one of the vehicles into the manufacturer to have it looked at. And they took a look at it. Their corporate mechanic came in. And corporate mechanics are special mechanics that look for I guess, manufacturing errors in the production of the vehicle so that the corporation can correct the either software or physical problem with the vehicle. And they gave me free repairs based on what they found, and they wouldn't tell me exactly what they found.

Well, this is all pretty distressing. And to think that your patriotic American serve your country, fought and was wounded in Iraq, and for your government to be doing this to you because you're telling the truth is really the end. I mean, that that could happen.

Yeah, well, I took the attitude of, I can beat these guys, and I'm I'm better than they are, and I'm smarter than they are. So it just became a game to me. And I just played the game, and I played the game, and I outsmarded them every step of the way because their ultimate goal was to prevent me from this story getting out to the global audience. And I knew that's what their objective was. And their other objective was to skew me as a crazy, right? So we're either going to paint this person as a crazy, and we're going to prevent them so that at least my word or my voice has no impact. And they failed on both accounts. Because the main thing is I had documented everything that was happening, the license plates, the people following me, the fingerprints in my house. They're not my fingerprints. And the best part is I brought those fingerprints to the Marquette County Sheriff's Department, brought them to the FBI. And I even had a referral from Sandia National Laboratories counterintelligence, eventually, to the FBI, telling them to investigate this, and they refused to run the prints.

Have they ever run the prints? No.

And this is where it gets really interesting. To this day? To this day, and I still have them.

Why?

I mean, I guess it's probably someone from law enforcement. It's probably a Sheriff's Department employee. It could be someone politically that they used in the operation. I mean, if you look at how... When they want to target someone or an individual, and I'm not the first US government scientist to go through this, it's well documented that the person they blamed for the Bacillus anthraxis attacks after 9/11. So you remember the anthrax mailings?

Do I remember?

Yeah. Yeah. So they pinned that to a guy by the name of Dr. Bruce Ivins.

Well, first it was Dr. Steven Hatfield.

Yes. Yeah. And then it was Dr. Bruce Ivins. And they ran a operation on him, which was like cointel pro, to make him crack. And eventually, he kills himself. He can't handle the pressure. While they ran the same type of operation on me. I didn't crack.

I hate to go far afield because this is an amazing story, but you brought it up, so I'm going to have to ask you, give me the Cliff Notes version of what those anthrax attacks actually were, which for people who were not around then, killed a number of people, media employees, anthrax-packed envelopes were sent to the newsrooms of a bunch of media organizations. I actually got one at my house. It was a big deal. This was right after that.

Yes. So someone who had access to Usamrid Laboratory. Which laboratory? Usamrid. I forget what the acronym stands for. It's the Biowe weapons Laboratory or biodefense laboratory. In Maryland. Correct.

Yeah.

And so Dr. Bruce Ivan worked in that laboratory. He worked on vaccine technology and the spores which are weaponized to be dispersed.

The anthrax spores. Correct.

And what's unique about these spores is that when they're weaponized, they go through a process called tinning. And what that tinning does, it makes them so that they stay aerosolized. Because if you have Bacillus anthraxus, it's too big of a agent. It falls to the ground, it sits. To weaponize it, you want to make it so it stays dispersed and-Light and fluffy. Exactly. Dr. Bruce Ivins was a specialist in that, making these things stay aerosolized, and then also developing the countermeasures to it. So if you're a real conspiracy theorist, you'd that someone engaged in the false flagging of the anthrax attacks to promote the anthrax vaccine, potentially. I mean, that's- Just potentially. That's one theory that's out there. I personally believe from analyzing all the different evidence that Dr. Bruce Ivins is not the person that did it. From my professional network, I know several people that work directly with him. He's very much a very soft, loving person. I don't see this person all of a sudden taking the spores out of his laboratory and then mailing them to people. This could have been done to continue the biodefense program around Bacillus anthraxis as one possible scenario.

Scenario. So anyways, we're off track here.

So there is no... Because no one was ever charged with it. Is that a remember or was he charged?

I think they were in the process of charging him.

Well, certainly no one was convicted of it. Yes. Right. And he killed himself. Well, they say he killed himself. He's dead in any case. But has any other meaningful suspect ever emerged that you're aware of?

Well, I have my opinions of who was likely involved, and I don't want to defame those people. No, and I hope you won't use names.

But can you just give it? Can you characterize who these people were and what their motive might have been in your view?

In my opinion, they're likely associated with with the biodefense complex, and their motive could have been to create more fear, hostility after 9/11 in the population. It could have been financial. Those are probably the two leading motives as to why that happened, my expert opinion. And then actually in private, afterward, they'll tell you who I think probably is involved. But me being an expert in biodefense, I mean, this is something of one of the first things I did deep dives on, even in fact, in my PhD coursework, it was taught by Dr. Mike Osterhomo, who he and I do not see eye to eye in a lot of things. He taught this in his course. This was a case study around biodefense.

Yeah, there are a lot of bio labs outside this country, I've noticed, run by the US government.

Well, they're not really run by the US government. So there's this thing called the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program, CBEP, and there's a few other programs. And the idea is we engage in scientific diplomacy with foreign laboratories so our enemies do not become allied with them. So for example, the Ukraine labs. I actually was involved in writing some of the proposals for those laboratories, and I can't say with who I'm under NDA, but Here's the issue. If we don't engage in those cooperative biological engagement programs with a laboratory like in Ukraine, there's a very real possibility that the Chinese will or the Russians will. I get it. So it's better that we're working with them.

I understand. No, I don't. But that's not crazy. I don't think it's certainly I understand how people talk themselves into that. It's not prima facia, insane or evil. What I find obviously insane and evil is the lying about it. The Undersecretary of State said in a Senate hearing a few years ago after the Ukraine war broke out on camera under oath, this is Victoria Nuland, architect of the current disaster in Ukraine, that she was worried about the bio labs there. She said that on camera. Okay, all right, you said it, honey. I played the tape and was immediately attacked by everybody, all the other, CNN and all the other Intel community-controlled news outlets as a conspiracy, Wacko. There are no bio labs in Ukraine. What are you talking about?

Same.

What is that?

I don't understand how the Biden administration handled the messaging and the communications around that. I don't know why Ms. Newland actually said the things or said the things the way that she did. She's stupid.

That's one of her deepest secrets. She's an idiot.

It would have been so much easier just to come on and tell the truth. We have this thing called the Chemical Biological Engagement program, and we had a relationship with these laboratories in Ukraine. Actually, this is publishing information by the Department of Defense and the State Department, other agencies involved. You can go look at CBEPS maps and see where we have this information, or you can play the where you go look at awarded proposals which are not classified. So there's ways to find this information. It's not secret. And they're using private companies and universities to have these relationships with these different laboratories. And that's what scientific diplomacy is about.

Why would you lie about it? And why would news organizations collaborate in those lies? To me, as a non-scientist, but a student of human nature, that's a tell that something's bad going on. Why would you lie about Well, I think the Biden administration was completely incompetent in all these areas.

I think it was looking at Ms. Newland, specifically. I believe that she didn't know what she didn't know. It was a case of that.

That is one of the huge problems of being dumb. Yeah. Is you don't know what you don't know.

She probably couldn't articulate anything that would be the truth without putting herself in risk of being a perjuring herself. I think she gave the answer to not purger herself, not knowing what she I didn't know.

Stupidity is often the real explanation for a lot of things.

Well, the truthful answer could have been, well, Senator so and so, I don't know. My office will look into that and we'll give you a written response within a week. And that's how they train us.

Yeah, of course. Well, that's what honest people do. It's just tell the truth. But I just thought it was interesting that the media cooperated with the cover up in that, and a million others, of course. But why What is that?

Well, that was all part of the psychological operation because remember, this didn't happen in a vacuum. They probably didn't want to undermine the public perception of the government related to the COVID origin story. So more of these conspiracy theories that turned out to be true, it undermines the credibility of the main narrative that they're trying to set, which was COVID emerged from the market.

Can I ask an even bigger and dumber question, which is why would the US government have an interest in lying about that? Why not? China is our rival on many levels, economic and military, primarily. And we're often told that we're in a war against China, fight with China, race against China. Why would the same people telling us that go out of their way to cover up the fact that the virus came from a Chinese biowe weapons lab?

Well, the government's people, first of all. We always refer to it as the government, but you work in Washington, DC in this space, and any program area that a person could be affiliated with has people running it. Yes. Those people don't want to be held accountable. No, that's right. That's exactly right. And they obviously are living in a state of fear of what could happen if they were held accountable. So they make decisions to protect themselves out of their self-interest, and they happen to hold some power or leverage your heads of relationships to execute on that operation plan. That's totally right.

Yeah, I mean, clearly true. So you start telling the truth, they start tailing you, tased your dog, trying to drive you insane. All that is very, very familiar to me. You don't feel like they're going to want to kill you, but they want you to shut up or at least become a fringe figure that nobody pays attention to.

Yes, absolutely. Here's just a quick story, and maybe I'll cut this in differently. But one of the funny things that they did was that it had been a really stressful summer of working on my book, writing it because of the I had deadlines, and I'm not able to meet the deadlines because of the hacking, being tailed, all these different things. Well, my wife and I decided to go to a music festival in Chicago, and it's a decent drive, six, seven hours down to Chicago. And while we're staying at the hotel, someone is hovering a drone outside the window of our hotel room.

Yeah.

And the funny thing is-I hope you flashed them. I walk around probably naked all the time because I'm a former army infantryman. I don't care who sees me naked. And I live out the middle of nowhere, so I'll just go outside naked sometimes. But anyways, we're in Chicago. And the thing is the FBI or these federal agents or maybe state agents operating illegally weren't very smart. So our room faced an alley in Chicago, and there was a tall glass building next to us. So I look at the glass building across from us, and I can see the people operating the drone in the room above us.

No way. Yes.

So what I do, I actually put on my pants, go upstairs, and I pound on the door and, Come out of this fucking room. I caught you. And I'm screaming this in the hotel room in Chicago. And I'm excited because this is the first time where I've actually been able to confront these people, and the room goes dead silent. So what do I do? I go over to the fire door, which is right next to this hotel. I remember it was up against the stairwell, and we're on the third floor, they're on the fourth. And I make a quick decision to trick these guys. So I open up this door, this heavy fire door, and I allow it to slam, and I make the noise with my feet that I'm going down the stairs. Actually, I went upstairs, quietly, and above the room to the fifth floor. And I'm standing there listening to the floor, and I hear cases closing, things snapping. And which way they're going to exit? They're obviously not going to go down the fire escape or at the end of the building. The only other way they go, they're going to go down the hallway to the next stairway or elevator.

So I start running down the fifth floor, ahead of these guys, and I hear footsteps and cases and things. Well, I heard the case of closing, I hear the footsteps coming down the hallway, and I get to the next stairway, and I open up the door, and they pop out right in front of me. No way. But I'm on the fifth floor, and they're coming out on the fourth, and I'm looking down them and they go running down the stairs to the first floor, and I'm laughing. So I go over the elevator, I go down the elevator casually. I come on the lobby like there's nothing wrong. And the two guys are sitting in chairs and I walk over to them and say, Hey, guys, did you see two guys come running down the stairs? And they have wristbands on from drinking it at the music festival or bars, wherever they were, following us around all day. And they said, no, we haven't seen anyone. They look like they're sweating. And I go over to them, I laugh, and I go over to the desk of the lobby and say, hey, what's your name? Can I get your phone number?

I'm going to have my attorneys call you. We're going to get a copy of the surveillance footage of these guys. And I'm like, I'm going to come back and I'm going to buy you dinner next year. And she said, okay. She gave me my information. She's like, why? I'm like, oh, it's not a big deal. So anyways, that happens. A week goes by. The next week, we're back at home. And I had trespassers on my property. And sometimes the state police and federal agents would come onto my property and just run around the bushes around my house to freak me out, or thinking that they were freaking me out. I laughed at most of this. So I call 911 to report the stress passers, and I'm working in my garage on some project, and they're playing music and sounds from their phones, trying to get me to come out and run after them or something. So anyways, 45 minutes go by, the police haven't arrived. And sometimes that's not uncommon, probably for a trespassing claim in the UP of Michigan. So I call back and the dispatcher or the 911 operator gives me the phone number of the state police officer that is responding to the call, and I'm supposed to call them on the cell phone.

Well, I go call the phone number on my cell phone, and the phone rings in the bushes. No way. I'm not kidding. And I start laughing. And they know because you could hear it, you get shot off real quick. And I'm just like, I just caught these guys. Like, this is concrete evidence you can obtain from the location of the person's cell phone when the phone calls made.

I mean, I know- Were any of these people ever punished? The drone operators, the state cop?

No. So these people haven't been punished. The state cop, his name is Deputy Bray. I know who he is, and he has actually a family in Iron Mountain, Michigan. So I don't know to what extent. There was another person. I actually witnessed one of the state police officers in my house through a through a plate glass window. I was out working on the property. He was on my computer trying to destroy evidence, I think. He lived in the town. And the rest of much of this came from the state police, which is the Governor Whitmer administration. Totally corrupt history of working with the FBI to harass- Totally corrupt person, yes. So I don't know if they've ever been held accountable. I know for a fact that the FBI office in the state of Michigan had been spreading rumors with state and local law enforcement. Excuse me. County and local law enforcement that I was dangerous. I mean, this is- And no one was ever held accountable.

What about your former coworkers at Ego Health Alliance? Where are they now?

I haven't checked in a while. So Dr. Billy Koresh, who I actually really liked, he was the executive vice president. He was second to Peter. He wound up at the Aspen Institute.

Good. That's the most perfect thing I've ever heard. Okay. It was either that or the Atlantic Council or Georgetown University. I knew it was one of the three.

Okay. Funny. The other vice presidents, Dr. Epstein or Dr. Oeval, I'm not sure where they are. I know Dr. Dasik is trying to get something new going, which is basically, it sounds like the same thing. I understand why there have been a series- Has Dr..

Dasik ever faced any penalty at all for participating in this?

No. The best part is, what's crazy about all this, I should say, is that I attended a number of the hearings in the COVID Select Committee in person, and I was there for Dr. Dasik's drilling. And they have the part where they go through, where basically he's denying that any of this is gain of function, his involvement, and he's fighting back. And then it gets to the end of the Congressional hearings where counsel for both the Democrats and Republicans get the chance to examine the witness. And during that questioning, they actually asked Dr. Dasik whether or not he was working with the intelligence community. And at first he lies. He says no, that he wasn't. And then they had actually obtained records that he was, which was apparent. I didn't know that at the time, and they pushed him on it, and then he came clean that he was. So it's on the official record that he was working with the intelligence like me. That's craziness. And nobody talks about that. That wasn't in the news, but that came out at the end of the hearing.

I guess you would have no way to know whether CIA ever gathered meaningful intelligence from the Wuhan Institute of Urology.

In my opinion, probably not. Probably not. That's so often the case. I get this question. It's like when I worked at the National Laboratory, if we had anyone who was foreign to the lab, and I mean, anyone external to Sandia, come to the laboratory, we would give them what I call the special tour. So they would have their Sandia minder, and we'd take them to an area which we had bug-sweoped before. And then we'd show them whenever we wanted to show the dog and pony show. And the second we left, that area would be bug-checked before or after they left. So if that's what we do in the United States, and that's our standard protocol for top secret, secret environments, we don't think the Chinese are doing the same thing. So you have all these US government officials and Dr. Dasik visiting that laboratory. They would just take them around to them like, oh, this is our microbiology laboratory. This is our ventilation hood where we do sample work. I mean, just looking at the equipment in a laboratory sometimes doesn't actually tell you what they're working on either. Well, of course not. Because you're dealing with viruses.

You can't see these things or bacteria or pathogens.

Right. I can see someone's kitchen stove. I don't know what they're making for dinner. Exactly. So you've told a remarkable story, and you know it's remarkable because of the length they went to keep you from telling it. But with the benefit of several years, five years, really, of hindsight and thinking about this, what do you think this was? Was this an accidental leak from the Wuhan lab? And they backfilled after that? Was this something else? What's your view?

So the way that I'm trained and the way that I've worked in this type of intelligence aspect of the science is you look at scenarios. So you come up with every possible scenario, and then you use hypothesis testing evidence to eliminate hypothesis or scenarios. So we're now at the stage where this could be a few different things. One, it could have been a pure accidental release of from the Wuhan laboratory. And if it's that scenario, it looks like it was a laboratory employee, potentially a graduate student who had been working in that laboratory. It could have been-Who became infected, then spread it unknowingly to the world. Correct. That is, I think, the scenario which has the most favor publicly and among experts who are now committed to the fact that this is a laboratory leak. It could have been an intentional release. That still hasn't been eliminated. One or multiple groups could have intentionally released the agent. There's one troubling aspect of this is that there are types of studies or scientific studies which we could have ran to has inclusively identified the origin of the disease in space and time. And this is a classic epidemiological method.

There are blood banks and historical records of disease is through blood donation programs globally. That's right. So what we do is we go to those blood banks, look at old samples, or we look at other tissues or samples that have been collected.

That's what they did with HIV.

And then you look through, okay, is in this location here, what time, when? And then now with modern technology, you can actually use more genetic applications to look at the... So because SARS-CoV-2 evolved so rapidly, you can actually look at the phylogenetic tree to see where in time was is this sample? And you'd follow that back. Then with the location, information you're obtaining of positive hits, where the positive samples were found to eventually trace you back to the origin. And that study has never been done at scale, and I don't know why. It's another one of those questions like, why haven't we done this? And there's a number of organizations and the US military that could look at their own genetic blood bank samples to to figure out where this came from and when. Maybe they've already done that, right? Because that would happen behind closed doors, and the Department of Defense or Defense Medical Agencies would do that. So these are questions that could be answered, and they haven't been answered. And I have more thoughts and opinions to what has transpired related to the origin of this disease. And I'm now at the position of that if this investigation were to take place because the world is in such a tenuous position in terms of a potential for World War III, that should happen in a classified setting.

And that investigation should be in the form of a Using the UCMJ process with the Department of Defense because Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Dasik, Ralph Barrick, all these people are essentially working on a defense program. They're working with DOD. It falls under UCMJ UCMJ authority legally. Not many people know that. It's not just people-Uniform Code of Military Justice. Yes. So people who are working with the DOD, whether they're a civilian or government employee on a project, project diffuse, are subject to UCMJ. That's where the investigation should happen. It shouldn't happen at the Department of Justice. I believe that Secretary Hegset has the leadership to execute this properly. And if the investigation warrants, then criminal charges could be brought under UCMJ in a classified setting. So basically a classified trial, which exists. Then set a time period of 5 to 10 years to release the results of that criminal trial publicly. Obviously, if someone's found guilty in their imprisoned, you'll know that there are some wrongdoing. But I don't think that we're... My greatest concern is that if there were more nefarious components of this, now is not the time to release that information publicly.

Because the world sits It's on the cusp of a global war.

Exactly. I'm actually following our leaders here.

There have been a series- That is a very balanced view, let me just say. Well, thank you. For those who would dismiss you as a Wacko, I don't know what I think of that. I haven't thought of it until you said it, but I think that's a window into the way that you think, which is in a restrained and responsible way.

Well, thank you. And that opinion or or that belief in that process, just came to me in the last week. And that's from looking at the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard in her office, declining some foya requests from several groups related to the origin of COVID and the story. And I firmly believe that Director Gabbard is on the right side of humanity and history. I'm a huge fan of hers, and I've had some conversation with her back and forth on social media. Direct It was direct messages. And we have some friends that are friends of a friend thing. I believe her heart's in the right place.

I can verify that through a decade of knowing her well. And she's one of the only famous people I've ever met, maybe the only famous person I've ever met, who not only didn't get... She doesn't own a home because she's never made any money at all, because that's the last thing on her mind. So who else can you say that about?

Not many people. That's right. And so looking at her leadership right now in her office's leadership in their response to these foya requests, and the nature of these FOIA requests would actually get at some of these root issues, and they're objecting to them, and they're not releasing the information. She's in the position now where she knows a lot more about what happened or what really happened than she did before President Trump was elected, and she was nominated into that position and eventually became the director. So looking at that, I think they're making the same assessment that I am. Yeah.

That, of course, it was a lab leak. I mean, I don't really... When you said the portion of the scientific community, so-called that ascribes to the lab leak theory, that suggests that there are people who are still pushing the pangulum lie?

Absolutely. Are there? Yes. Well, if you go over to the other Twitter Blue, whatever it's called, Blue Sky, I think, I can't remember the name it. But on social media, there are other groups of scientists in publicly saying that this was still a laboratory leak. In fact, they haven't retracted- That it was not a laboratory leak. That it was not a laboratory leak. They still haven't retracted the proximal origins paper, which is a complete fraud. Are you serious? No. And Dr. E. Bright from Rutgers University, who I admire and respect, he's fighting this, the good fight every day on social media as an old seasoned professor should. So the whole complex of either the pharmaceutical industry, the scientific community that works tightly with the pharmaceutical industry or are funded by the agencies involved in this are all opposing the lab... Excuse me, they're all opposing the lab leak.

The vaccine manufacturers are opposed.

I would believe so. Well, not them directly, because they're not making public statements on this, but if you look at, you follow the money. So if you look at the scientists, okay, and where they get their money from, many of the people who are involved in MRNA technology development associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are in the camp of this was a naturally emerging disease.

I'm using air quotes around the word doctor, but Dr. Peter Hotez, for example, a vax pusher of long-standing. Is he, just to name one name, is Is he pushing the pangolin lie still?

I don't know if he's pushing it still, but I mean, he was. He was pushing the natural emergency theory quite profoundly everywhere he went for a period of time. Why would...

That's such an interesting nexus. Why would people who are promoting vaccines want to lie about the origin of COVID?

Well, Dr. Hotes is actually a more interesting specific person that you name because he actually has connections to the Wuhan Institute of Virology as well. So he's directly linked back to the origin story than other scientists in the vaccine. Really? Yes.

In what way?

I forget that he has some either publication record with scientists there or collaboration of research, I believe.

Yeah. It's interesting. You really feel like you don't know your country very well. I knew people who believed Dr. Peter Hotez, and I thought to myself, how could this... I mean, this is so clearly not true. I don't know how you could believe that. It was really a divisive time in the country or a revealing time, and the truth led to division. I guess maybe it's a better way to put it. But anyway, but why in general leaving Hotez out of it? Why would a vax pusher not want to tell the truth about the origin of the virus?

Simply that gain a function technology is used for virology vaccine development. And mRNA is a huge portfolio of new vaccine technology development.

Thank you.

Okay, that's the answer. The funny thing is, if you look at mRNA technology and its future, a lot of corporations have banked in the pharmaceutical or biotech industry, and mRNA being the future vaccine technology. And I think if you look at the rise in cancers associated with mRNA technology in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and there's a new study, a recent study that came out in Korea, which is a massive cohort study with a large... It has a lot of statistical power. Found five or six cancers that were associated with the vaccine. Okay, and many of these other studies looked at one type of cancer, for example, lymphoma in Sweden. They didn't find an association. But this Korean study looked at all types of cancers, and they're now finding these associations. So the writing's on the wall for mRNA technology, I do not think that it's going to be the future vaccine technology. Frankly, I'm not so concerned anymore with the the old way of thinking that the emerging infectious disease threat that we should be concerned about are old world diseases. So Bacillus antheresis being weaponized, for example, a coronavirus being weaponized. Gain of function technology has evolved within the last 2-3 years at such a rapid pace.

The future threat we need to be mitigating against and protecting against is actually synthetic pathogens in synthetic life. And I don't think, and I know for a fact, that most of the world isn't aware that we've actually already created single cell life. It exists. The paper, the seminal paper on it came out three years ago. So we now have fully functioning synthetic cells, which are created with nanotechnology and some of those. And I could get in the weeds on what that nanotechnology is, which I can self-replicate. And so what this means, if you step back and what this means- Wait, so man has created life? Technically synthetic, yes.

And by synthetic, what is it? But if it behaves independently and it's self-replicating, then aren't those the criteria for life?

Well, that's a whole philosophical debate.

Yeah, I don't want to believe it, so I'm happy to have the definition readjusted, but that would be the obvious definition of it, right?

And there's also synthetic cloning now. So you can have an agent if you know exactly a pathogen or a cell. And some of this isn't advanced advanced. So if it's more complicated cell type, for example, you might not be able to replicate that. But you can now synthetically generate a virus to match the virus. So what that means is you don't have to have the actual virus. You don't have to collect a sample anymore. You can just have the code and you can generate it. That's where we are now. Right. And that's for viruses. Now, if we're talking- You can text me the code and I can make the virus. I believe we'll be there in the near future with bacteria. And And with synthetic life, though, you can generate very radical things, because what this means is we can make what it would be defined as a single cell synthetic organism, which does different things that don't exist. And it has massive potential good uses and bad uses. The good uses, you could use this, and I could see this being popular among scientists, funded by the Borolog program at USDA, where they use this for pest control.

And you could target, make it so it was very specific, the synthetic cell or organism or bacteria, to target something like a pest, like a grasshopper, for example.

Or white people.

Well, we're going to get to the other side of this. That would only target a specific species defined to a geographic region, so you might not worry of it spilling over into some other insect population, in theory. Okay, this This is... What I'm talking about here is the emerging future trend of this. Now, on the nefarious side of this, how is it going to be used? We're no longer talking about what living things. So you can engineer a synthetic pathogen to attack equipment. So you can have it have that synthetic organism produce an acid that would eat metal. You could have it produce a biofilm which would attack metal underwater, like a submarine. This technology is being developed right now at a handful of places. Some of it's in the United States, much of it is. Some of it is not. Most of the places it's being developed are friendly to the United States or are allies. But this synthetic threat is rapidly emerging. So that's the biotechnology side. Now, if you take a look at, and I know I've been watching your show in recent episode AI has been a big hot topic, and there's tons of investment going into it.

We're going to see a fusion between this synthetic biology technology and AI. And it's probably on the 4-5 year horizon. And the AI will be programmed into the micro circuits systems of the nanotechnology. It's a fact. I mean, You're going to use the best software, the best programs. You can get onto a basically a nano computer within that cell, which does the programming. This might sound like crazy science fiction to a lot of people. People say that's not possible.

I don't think anyone would say that's not possible.

I can point to a peer-reviewed publication where they're doing all the components of this, and it's just a matter of time before someone gets wise and assembles it. And there's going to be plenty of financial motive to do this. So there's no stopping it. And that's what I'm saying. There's no stopping where this is headed. And the reason why I say that, the Trump administration did some great work with Russia, trying to negotiate a new biological treaty.

I just want to apologize in public for every moment I've defended our economic system, because any system that allows something like this is a bad system.

Well, I don't think... So all technology is dual use, right? It's like firearms. It's a classic example. A firearms in a good person's hand is is a tool to defend and protect yourself, your family, against tyranny. In an evil person's hand-Yeah, nuclear power, nuclear bombs, I get it.

But you just have to assess the downside risk realistically as compared to the upside benefit. And I think with the technology, well, nuclear technology, I believe this, and certainly true with everything you're describing, downside risk way far outweighs any potential gain. You live to 110, okay.

So I'd argue this. I can completely agree with the upside and downside risk of this. But what I'm saying is there's no stopping it. No, I'm- And this is why what I was going to say related to President Trump and the Trump administration negotiating a new biological treaty with the international community. Well, one, looking at history back to the '70s, I don't think it's going to be effective. So the existing biological weapons convention we have is outdated. It focuses on select agents, basically, that which can be weaponized through gain of function technology. They baked a loophole into it to develop countermeasures. That's vaccine technologies and other prophylactic. And you can engage in the gain of function technology biology, bioweapon development, if you're developing the countermeasure. And they couldn't get anyone to go further past that with having inspections. And I don't see that posture, especially today in today's climate, changing.

So we blew up the Nord Stream pipeline. The basis of international treaty, of course, is trust, and there's none. So no more international treaties.

Well, I hope.

I hope I'm wrong, too. I hope I'm wrong, too, but I just don't see it right now?

Well, I think that there's a path forward. And the path forward to- Before we get to the path forward, can we just get to a broader description, more precise description of what the marriage of nanotechnology to AI means?

What does that mean?

Sure. So the marriage of nanotechnology to AI means that the AI... Excuse me. The nanotechnology will have swarm-like capabilities. So people, or the general world is probably more familiar with sworn technology around drones. They're using this and they're testing this, and they're trying to field these rapid sworn technologies. And if you watch these large displays of drone shows that you see commonly in China, that's really them just openly testing drone sworn technology. Yeah. And that's the civilian, this is cool tech application, but there's actually a much more sinister application of that same technology for defense, dual-use technology. Imagine that these pathogens are like these drones, and you see them operate. Ai will control this sworn technology around the synthetic pathogens so that they can control their behavior. And then also that the machine inside the synthetic cell can adapt to environment without any human construction or code or decision making.

So what would that look like?

In terms of...

Well, I don't know. I can imagine a drone sworn. I've seen one. What would that mean? So you have synthetic cells that are controlled by a computer, and then they do what?

Well, they would... Use cases always help define what that is. So in a weaponization scenario, you could use this to deploy a container. Maybe it looks like a bomb into an ocean where you know where a submarine is. The synthetic life could be magnetic and attract to the whole of a submarine. It would attach itself, and then it would make decisions about where it should collect on the surface of the submarine independently to create a biofilm and self-replicate to basically cause the sensors or to disable the submarine in some way. In space, to use a similar type of, maybe, I'm not so sure what the delivery vehicle is, but say that you were to get this onto a satellite, you could use it then to eat and corrode the silicon and magnesium and the structure of that, you could use it to basically disable the systems on board of the physical structure of the vessel or the satellite. And that's just, I mean, What's really so striking about this is this technology will be able to use to attack objects, but it's a synthetic living thing. There's also the life, so there's a new fork here.

You can use it to attack objects, or you can use it to attack life itself. And that's more what people would be familiar with. You could use it to attack specific genetic populations, for example. So if a certain population had a genetic trait, you can make these synthetic pathogen. Specifically target, name your niche of race or population of genetically related, close related families.

How about the ones who were given fentanyl and denied jobs in the United States? No, I'm just being super dark. No, but honest.

More difficult, probably. Well, unless they had some specific- No, I'm half kidding, but you...

So I remember Bobby Kennedy got into a great deal of trouble because he said at some event, of course, the New York Post led the charge against him, of course. But that COVID could be tailored, or in fact, for whatever reason, COVID had disparate effects on populations.

That's absolutely true. I mean, that's scientifically true. And I was quite familiar with that literature when he made that- What does that mean?

Which population suffered most from COVID?

There was a finding in a scientific publication that two different populations of... Well, two different populations of people of Jewish ancestry, depending which line they're from, one was more heavily impacted than the other. And that was- Sephardic Ashkanazi. Yes. And that was the finding. And I think the point that he was trying to make or maybe didn't articulate well is that the agent can be tailored to have that effect. And that's absolutely true. And that's through old gain of function technology And with synthetic, full synthetics, what I'm saying is you can make this so specific as that if I got your DNA, say that you threw a cup, I can tailor an agent just to you. And this is how it's changing. And if you're using AI behind that. I could then, and I say that I got a DNA sample from a couple of your relatives, so I knew what your family tree partially looked like. Machine learning is very good at actually random forest and tree decision making. You do a lot of complex AI behind this to figure out and make predictions that AI could about what your family tree look like and have the disease travel through your family line.

Nobody has ever asked me that question. I just generated that answer based on what I know, but I think that that is a very real possibility, use or application of this type of technology. It also could be used on the flip side of it. You could use it to target specific and rare cancers. It could be used to eliminate those cancers cleanly and self-deactivate and decompose in a way that didn't harm your body. So this technology is going to go, could go two different ways, but it's coming because the medical applications, it's in health care applications of it, are there. They're going to be They will be extremely profitable. Imagine that you said, you have cancer, I don't have to give you a drug. I have to inject you with this synthetic, which will seek out the cancer, the tumor in your body, and contain it, kill it with no other harmful effects to your body, in theory. Like I say, in theory, because things always have side effects, right?

Of course. I just say, in general, I would much rather live in a world where I risked dying of tetanus and the common cold than live in a world with this technology. It's not even close. I have a million more questions to ask you, but that's what you just said is so upsetting that I think you've broken my spirit, Dr. Huff.

I think there's a better solution. Let me give you the upside this, though. So the solution to these problems is typically better biosurveillance. And this is what Equal Health was trying to do. And the part of it that actually works is you can't really understand what's circulating in the world in terms of pathogens, life, unless scientists and engineers are measuring it or trying to identify and look at it. You can't find what you're not looking for. And it would be great to see an international team of scientists working on the technology to detect synthetic life when it emerges. Because if we all think it's a threat, we don't have to put our head in the sand and ostrich. If we're all just looking for it, we can identify it. Early warnings of threats save lives, livestock, animals. The early warnings signal is the most important aspect of defending against future emerging threats. And if we To develop that technology, we'll be safer.

Yeah. What you really need, though, to be safe is good people.

Ethical people. And that's a huge problem in science. I could talk forever about that. They're not teaching ethics to people like me.

They haven't been to the doctor in five years as a result. As corrupt as every other institution. Wow, what a heavy conversation that was. Thank you. Where can people, if people are interested in finding out more people with a stronger stomach and stouter heart than I have, want to know more about the last 10 minutes of our conversation. Do you write about this?

Well, I've started to, and I'm not sure how it's been received. I published it on Substack. I've done it, published a little bit on X and then also on LinkedIn. And it's not very... I don't think people are catching on. Actually, I just solicited proposals to Darpa and a few other places saying, Hey, we should be looking at this. And I already know for a fact that they've been thinking in it, and they've been dabbling, and they put a little money into it. So I'm actively working on this. If you want to, for the limited time that I... The few things that I do publish about this, I put it on action. Ag Huff is my Twitter account. But other than that, this is all very much evolving, and it's a work in progress.

It's amazing when you said gain of function research has changed so much in the... And I'm thinking, what time frame is he going to lay out here? Because I think most normal people would assume after COVID, there be a dramatic reduction in gain of function research, considering that's what gave us COVID and wrecked our country. But you said in the last two or three years.

It's now the building. So if you're in biomedical research, in microbiology or virology or bioengineering, it's something that you get trained on and you learn to now advance to... It's a building block to learn about synthetic biology. So there's going to be more More research professors leading universities within the next five years teaching this to... And it's a trickle down.

I always knew science was bad. I just want to brag. I just want to lay my marker down. I just want to say I've always been opposed to science. I've always been opposed to technology. I'm not stupid, but I am convinced of that. I have been my whole life. So I think I'm being vindicated in real-time.

Well, maybe I can cheer you up a bit. It's not all evil. To your point earlier, it's the people behind it. Well, that's it. And maybe we need to do a better... My community, the scientific community, needs to do a better job of training our students not to be evil. And that comes through how we select our students, how we mentor them, and how we show them or teach them what the ultimate goals in life are. And that comes through mentorship. And that has really fallen off, at least during my academic and scientific career, where everything is money-driven, financially-driven.

I've noticed.

And then on top of it, you have a lot of predatory professors and academics and scientists just praying on their students. And it's a vicious cycle. And I mean, what do I mean by preying on them?

Well-not just sexually.

Not sexually, but in terms of- That's the least of the problem. In the PhD world, it's very common that research professors basically steal their students work and have them take credit for their work. And the students aren't taught about ethics in science and research on top of it. I mean, it's not like it's required coursework. Most scientists don't train their students in ethics. So how do we become better as a community of creating better people as scientists so they're not just out chasing money? And it's mentorship, and we have to break the cycle. I mean, we have to break the cycle.

It's going to take a radical religious revival to do that. Nothing short of that is going to work. That's my view. That's what I'm hoping for because I feel like we are on the cusp of true darkness.

I agree. I think about these things a lot. Scientists, we have people ask me what I do. I'm sitting there staring out the window and I'm like, I'm working. They're like, I'm thinking through problems. People often wonder, what do PhDs do? We sit there and we think about these things and we try to come up with answers. We try not to waste our brainpower on things that don't matter. I don't know if it's with a full religious... If it's a fully religious aspects, at least within the scientific community. I'm being real here that I know many of these scientists are atheists, and I know that many of these scientists who are atheists, some of them, I should say, are great and fantastic people, at least at a minimum, for them to view themselves in the greater context of what it all means and try to have a positive force on the world through what they're doing.

But there's no positive or negative for an atheist. I mean, there's no hierarchy of value that rooted anything other than preference. None of that's real. How can you say something's bad if you don't believe that there's a power higher than you?

It's a great question.

You can't is the answer. You should never allow atheists to have this power. Not because they're evil. A lot of them are great people. I really like a lot of atheists. It's nothing personal. It's just that there's no check at all on the power if you think that you're God. That can't allowed. Dr. Huff, thank you. Amazing conversation. Pleasure to meet you. It's going to affect my sleep. Thank you. We've got a new website we hope you will visit. It's called newcommissionnow. Com, and it refers to a new 9/11 Commission. So we spent months putting together our 9/11 documentary series. And if there's one thing we learned, it's that In fact, there was foreknowledge of the attacks. People knew. The American public deserves to know. We're shocked, actually, to learn that, to have that confirmed, but it's true. The evidence is overwhelming. The CIA, for example, knew the hijackers were here in the United States. They knew they were planning an act of terror. In his passport is a visa to go to United States of America. A foreign national was caught celebrating as the World Trade Center fell and later said he was in New York, To document the event.

How did he know there It could be an event to document in the first place because he had floor knowledge. And maybe most amazingly, somebody, an unknown investor, shorted American Airlines and United Airlines, the companies whose planes the attackers used on 9/11, as well as the banks that were inside the Twin Towers just before the attacks. They made money on the 9/11 attacks because they knew they were coming. Who did that? You have to look at the evidence. The US government learned the name of that investor but never released Maybe there's an instant explanation for all this, but there isn't actually. And by the way, it doesn't matter whether there is or not. The public deserves to know what the hell that was. How did people know ahead of time why was no one ever punished for it? The 9/11 Commission, the original one, was a fraud. It was fake. Its conclusions were written before the investigation. That's true, and it's outrageous. This country needs a new 9/11 Commission, one that actually tells the that tries to get to the bottom of the story. We can't just move on like nothing happened.

9/11 Commission is a cover.

Something did happen. We need to force a new investigation into 9/11 almost 25 years later. Sorry, justice demands it. If you want that, go to newcommissionnow. Com to add your name to our petition. We're not getting paid for this. We're doing this because we really mean it. Newcommissionnow. Com.