The Tucker Carlson Show - Covid Whistleblower: Predicting Pandemics & Exposing the CIA and Peter Daszak’s Alliance With China

Episode Date: October 20, 2025

The people who created the Covid virus have never been punished. Dr. Andrew Huff knows them personally, which is why they’re trying to terrorize him into silence. (00:00) Peter Daszak, USAID, and Predicting Pandemics (08:49) The Moment Huff Realized His Company Was Doing Gain-Of-Function Research (14:07) China’s Bioweapons Labs, Wuhan, and the CIA (39:44) Big Pharma and the Government’s Covid Psyop (50:53) How They Targeted Dr. Huff for Speaking Out (1:00:35) Dr. Huff Being Mysteriously Followed (1:25:00) Was Anyone Held Accountable for Terrorizing Dr. Huff? Paid partnerships with: GCU: Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University. Learn more at https://GCU.edu Byrna: Go to https://Byrna.com or your local Sportsman's Warehouse today. Last Country Supply: Real prep starts with the basics. Here’s what I keep stocked: lastcountrysupply.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When you're with Amex Platinum, you get access to exclusive dining experiences and an annual travel credit. So the best tapas in town might be in a new town altogether. That's the powerful backing of Amex. Terms and conditions apply. Learn more at Amex.ca. 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 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology probably played a role. The U.S. government played a role. But it is impossible to find anyone, or it has been for us anyway, to find anyone who has kind of like direct connection to any of the main. players here and none of them will do an interview uh none you were the vice president of the eco health alliance um you're former military guy ties to the intel world you worked at federal nuclear lab in new mexico for years and then you wind up at your your scientist phd uh and then you wind up working for eco health alliance in new york city you think it's like this world wildlife fund operation designed to like

track diseases among wildlife globally and protect the wildlife, protect the people. It's like kind of 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. So that's the story that you told me at breakfast, which was 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. And thank you for having me. This is sort of like a dream of mine. Oh, well, I'm so excited you're here. And because this has been gnawing at me, you know, where did COVID come from? And how was the U.S. government

implicated? It clearly was, but you never meet anyone who can say that they know the players, but you do. So with that, you show up there, you become VP of EcoHealth Alliance, the now famous EcoHealth Alliance. And when did you start to realize this wasn't the World Wildlife Fund? Surely after I was working there. So I was hired as a senior scientist to take over a, well, I learned after the fact I sort of lied to. But it was a failing department that 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 actually sort of 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 Dasick, 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 like at the very center of COVID. Oh, absolutely. And we'll get to that. So Peter promotes me to vice president. And then I started 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 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 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. And I read through this phone book of material, and I assess that it's a giant boondoggle. 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 that 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. So this is your area. I should just say, like you've done a lot of research into how do you model this out? Like, 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 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 in the New York Post before the outbreak hit. And this was the Zika. Remember Zika virus?

Very well, yeah. I was working at Ecoeth Alliance. One of the models that I developed actually forecasted the amount of Zika bias 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. Like, 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.

Of course. They're talking about the 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? Right. 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 to a pandemic? So, but because this is your specific area, you look at the details of what EcoHealth 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. And 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 Dasick. And these fundraising events we're doing where we're telling everyone that we're going to go, 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, you know, as me being an ethical person and a good scientist, an engineer, what are we doing here? Right, because we're not doing the thing we said we were doing. Exactly. And, you know, it gets sort of 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, a budget and forecasting meeting. Budget, though, that's perfect. Yeah, it's a budget and 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, you know, operations types of things, typical corporate stuff. And, you know, I asked a question because, you know, well, how much money are we spending on wildlife conservation? And 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, you know, I'm looking at everyone and why is everyone sort of staring into space or staring at me? and eventually Peter Dasick looks at me

and with sort of a maniacal laughs says we're not doing, we're not doing any conservation work. Is this like a nightmare? Yeah, and I'm just, I'm just shocked. And, you know, I came directly from the national laboratory system, Sandia National Laboratories, and I was trying to get away from that type of work. I was actually excited to go work at a crunchy,

granola, non-profit organization where I was protecting wildlife. You thought it was the Autobond Society. Yeah, and as we were discussing earlier, we were both avid outdoorsmen. We love nature, that kind of thing. And I thought I was going to get into more of that. I was expected 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, you know, I digested. Of course, I don't say anything. It's my boss, my other, the other executives. And then it drives more questions. you know what what are we doing here and so i sat and sat in more executive meetings i learned more and i i quickly you know learned that we were sort of 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. It's so, this is so dark. I don't, it's a, 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 newer novel pathogen in a species, but it's sort of a one and done thing. It doesn't really drive future research, right? 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 EcoA Alliance and what some of my peers, other vice presidents, and 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 engaging in gain-of-function research and viral discovery to make new novel pathogens. And 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 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 Canyon University is not going to lie to your kids and claim otherwise. It tells the truth. So you know you're thinking a quality education is rare, so this probably costs a fortune.

College is 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.E.D. Listen, we're all looking for a way to make more money. But let's be honest, the idea of learning something new, taking on more risk, or working harder. Nobody wants that these days. That's where true trade comes in. Their AI-driven technology enables you to generate income passively.

Without risking your own capital, wasting your time, or needing years of experience, True Trade has created institutional-grade software, the same type hedge funds and big banks use, but now it's available to everyday people like you and me. And here's the best part. They'll even guarantee your trading capital. We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars you can trade with, and I don't know about you, but that kind of funding could be life-changing. Looking for a smarter way to make money?

Download their mobile app on Android or iOS or go to TrueTrade.io right now. That's t-R-U-T-R-A-D-E.I-O. Funded accounts are limited, so don't wait. Reserve your funding today and let technology earn for you. Sea Terms. This episode is brought to you by Peloton. A new era of fitness is here. Introducing the new Peloton Cross Training Tread Plus, powered by Peloton IQ,

built for breakthroughs with personalized workout plans, Real-time insights and endless ways to move. Lift with confidence while Peloton IQ counts reps, corrects form, and tracks your progress. Let yourself run, lift, flow, and go. Explore the new Peloton cross-training tread plus at one peloton.ca. So you're, rather than like predicting the threat to human and wildlife populations, you're actually just creating new deadly viruses. Exactly.

And the thing. This is not what they advertise. on LinkedIn. No, this was, well, 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 what the argument that they were effectively making back to the U.S. government and other sponsors of our research portfolio. In my book, I discussed this, but, you know, 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 U.S. agency involved, DOD, DHS, USDA, Fish and Wildlife. It's a long less the CIA, which we can get to in a little bit. So it's very clear that the research that we're doing had an 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 virology. And if you follow the proposals or scientific proposals and technical proposals, which were submitted to the U.S. 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-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. Right. Fast forward to today, I have much more information

where I can sort of, you know, I've 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 EcoEathliance 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, you know, I had this very interesting moment when I worked at Eco Health Alliance where it was around the holidays. I think I was in late 2015. I was working late to finish our project. And Dr. Dasick was working late.

project. And actually, as a co-worker, working with Dr. Peter Bassick 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. Very, well, I would say cunning. Yeah. I don't think he was much of a scientist. Actually, I think he's very weak as a scientist and 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 on the 15th floor of our building in New York City. And he goes, Andrew, do you mind if I ask you a question? That'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 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, you know, I'm a product of, you know, the so-called deep state of the National Security Complex. I held the top secret clearance. And here's my boss telling me that he had a side conversation at the CIA, and I have all these immediate thoughts. Was he really talking to someone from the CIA? was someone pretending to be from the C-Aid C-A-8 because I'm like, does this guy know what he's dealing with?

Exactly. You know, 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.

But well, over the next, you know, several weeks in between meetings at the coffee cooler, I had to ask Peter, like, hey, how's that thing with the CIA going? And, you know, he wouldn't say much, but, you know, sort of indicated that it was progressing. And about the third time I asked him, he was mum 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 bio-weapons laboratory. So how would you get access to it? 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, and I've told them so in writing, is that this wasn't the U.S.

government giving the Chinese $400,000 to conduct gain a function research. I mean, just think about how preposterous this is. Yeah, they don't need the money. They don't need the money. Right. So what do they need? What do you think? Tactical expertise, I would think.

And what else? The actual technology. Yeah. So the technical expertise and the technology. So the trade that was made is that we were actually transferring advanced biotechnology from Dr. Ralph Barrett's laboratory to the Chinese for access to the laboratory so we could collect intelligence on it. And some of that might, you know, fall under the, you know,

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 don't know, I have no, you 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 is, that's how things really are, right? Is the U.S. government makes deals with people that they're not really on their, you know, whoever it is, Gaddafi, Maduro. I mean, there's longstanding and ongoing. going 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 closer I get, the more until I can

gather. I think your assessment of the global scheme of how the U.S. government operates and formulates relationships is accurate. Oh, I've seen it. And I think a lot of that is doctrine. You know, they want to try to obtain close relationships with the highest ranking government officials possible. And sometimes the methods. and how they do that are questionable. But it's always the same. I mean, this is literally happening the other day. You're talking to, you know, a well-informed person.

And they're like, oh, yeah, yeah, I knew so-and-so. It's like, what? How in the world were you connected to that person who's bad? Kind of the human equivalent of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And it's like, well, because, like, 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 showed me pictures of the very high-profile evil people that they're working with.

Of course. And I actually have no problem with that. Omar Gaddafi 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. And I agree with your truth.

And I think the more questionable part is why are we giving advanced technology? to our enemies. And where this really gets strange is that back when I did work at EcoA Alliance, I did object to working with the Chinese. So the next phase of PREDIC funding is coming along, Predict 2. 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. Predicted and forecast. So maybe get a head start could be a more accurate framing or at least have an assessment of what circuit area and that's probably a fair characterization but predict two they're basically going to continue this boondoggle operation and expand the portfolio research with china and once i was promoted to vice president they put me onto the predict program at my own request because it was sort of the sexy thing that equal health alliance was doing and i wanted to be a part of it because you get by name of 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 Dasick floated that I help him with China. And when that came up in the meeting, I said, I want nothing to do with this. I'm, you know, 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, I'm like, aren't 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, you know, Peter gave a very political response that, you know, the work with China is very important. And this relationship that we have with the Chinese is very important. And 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, you know, he had already been sort of flipped as an intel asset to collect the Chinese in the lab. And this wasn't going away. And this was all the window dressing to make it look legitimate. We're sorry to say it, but this is not a very safe country. Walk through Oakland or Philadelphia. Yeah, good luck. So most people, when they think about this, want to carry a firearm. 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 yourself of the firearm. And that's why a lot of Americans are turning to Berna. It's a proudly American company.

Burna makes self-defense launchers that hundreds of law enforcement departments trust. They've sold over 600,000. and 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 and pepper projectiles, and they stop a threat from up to 60 feet away. There are no background checks, there are no waiting periods. Burna can ship it directly to your door. You can't be arrested for defending yourself with a Burna pistol.

Visit burnab-B-R-N-A.com or your local sportsman's warehouse to get yours today. Burna.com. The three ensemble Cephora of the fates that I've been to deniches who energize these ensemble. The format

standard and mini regrouped, what's the aband and the embellage, too beau, who is practically to do you know, and I know

I'd like the summer Fridays and Rare Beauty by Selena Gomez. I'm, I'm sure. The more ensembles

of the fadowdo of the fair beauty, way, Cifora collection and other part of Vite. Procurry you

these format and mini regrouped for a better quality price, on link on c. or in

I guess I. That's annoying. What? You're a muffler. You don't hear it? Oh, I don't even notice it. I usually drown it out with the radio. How's this?

Oh, yeah. Way better. Save on insurance by switching to Bel Air Direct and use the money to fix your car. Bell Air Direct, insurance, simplified. Conditions apply. Yeah, again, I don't have any background information so, like, 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 eco-health alliance was doing. So you said before you got to the portion when 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 exactly? How do you collect a virus in Sudan, for example, any country? How do you do that? Sure. So it's a, I guess in my mind, it's very straightforward. But typically, first, you form a relationship with the diplomatic mission, so the embassy, the council from the United States, they might refer you to either hospitals, professors, other academics, or company 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 and sort of do an assessment of their laboratories. You collect sort of information, tried to gauge you. These people have the capability. Do you know what they're doing? Are they going to spend our money wisely? So 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 through U.S. government systems

to make sure they're not terrorists or evil people. Right. So we're not giving money to terrorists. That didn't happen at Equal Health Alliance. It did not happen. I found out about that after the fact as well. But we try to figure out who these people are. And then if they're capable, oftentimes it's universities.

You know, 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 have our personnel travel to go collect the sample so if we're talking about bats it depends what species you're dealing with right but 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 swabs, 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's happening in the background here is that technology is advancing. Okay, 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 this 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 U.S. 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 airliners. typically and there's really not a whole lot of risk from a collected sample for first of all you don't even know at this point whether there's a new deadly virus present in the sample in the bat shit or saliva you have no clue once it gets back to the united states then it goes to at least at equal appliance it would go to uh 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 isolate and, well, at 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 Barrick's laboratory where he would continue the work down at Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill and do the gain of function work. It's just, just can I just approach this from an autistic perspective? So what you're saying is there are like people around the world in bat caves in some faraway 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 in packages, it's really that much.

not that much of a risk. And actually, Dr. Ralph Barrett developed some of these methods of how to send what's called a chimeric virus on a sheet of paper and an envelope, which is low risk. The bigger risk becomes when you start to clone or replicate that agent at scale, you know, human medicine, public health, epidemiology, transmission risk. Now you look at this, you have to have a substantial quantity of a virus, which is, you know, 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 and you don't even know it because your immune system fights it off. Right. So I think sometimes the risk is overblown and 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 and gain a function. Research. What kind of accidents? One of the high-profile ones was that, I think it was Bacillus anthracis was being shipped from one of our U.S. government BSL for 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. It wasn't properly secured and completely off the... Yeah, I mean, we live in a world with, like, Chernobyl and misdiagnoses and. I mean, I believe in science. I think there are a lot of, you know, rigorous, responsible scientists, but, you know, people make mistakes. I mean, over time and with scale, like, 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 Laboratories.

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 of risk. But it's always the human making a decision or behavior action involved in the system that makes a mistake, which causes some kind of catastrophic failure. Well, yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah. So, okay, I just was just interested. So then you say that the Eco Health Alliance was compiling a library of these viruses?

They'd be stored in one place? Well, yes, they had a digital library at Ecoeth Alliance. And then there's other systems that the U.S., or you should say, not only the United States, States, but the global virologist community maintain of genetic information on viruses. But the actual viruses, the living organisms, were they stored anywhere? Typically, we were buying negative ADC centigrade 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 they set.

And 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 and 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. So 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 Lastcountry Supply.com to shop for our new collection, bulk up now. There is no scenario where you will regret being prepared.

When you support Movember, you're not just fundraising. You're showing up for the men you love. Your dad, your brother, your partner, your friends. It isn't just a men's issue. It's a human one. That's why Movember exists to change the face of men's health. From mental health and suicide prevention to prostate and testicular cancer research and early detection, Movember is tackling the biggest health issues facing.

men today. Join the movement and donate now at Movember.com. Ontario, the wait is over. The gold standard of online casinos has arrived. Golden Nugget online casino is live, bringing Vegas-style excitement and a world-class gaming experience right to your fingertips. Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting, signing up is fast and simple. And in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots and top-tier table games. Make the most of your downtime with unbeating. Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots that can turn any mundane moment into a golden opportunity at golden nugget online casino take a spin on the slots challenge yourself at the tables

or join a live dealer game to feel the thrill of real-time action all from the comfort of your own devices why settle for less when you can go for the gold at golden nugget online casino gambling problem call connects Ontario 1866-531-2-6-00 19 and over physically present in Ontario eligibility restrictions apply see golden nugget casino.com for details please play responsibly what's the security like at a lab like that I in my opinion I tend to think that it's laughable and 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 it into most university laboratories. I heard arguments from other scientists who worked in these

laboratories. Well, you know, 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 scientist? A good physical security. Oh, I mean, if you are a motivated attacker and you're well trained, you can get into one of these laboratories. It would not be overly difficult. Now, has this improved and has this changed or all the laboratories 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 and recent history, I mean, speaking of this, you know, Ralph Barrack and his laboratory, he's had a series of leaks at his laboratory. over years, you know, where people, their employees have gotten sick. And typically it's one of the people

working in the laboratory is accidentally exposed and because it's a virus that you can't see in the way that disease incubates inside a person and how the bio-event 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 the 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 where 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 used to pre-COVID. there's probably more, 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 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 a 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

and Guam, I mean, there's all these things where they've, that was a hitchhiker scenario, but where they try to introduce some kind of predator to eliminate some kind of bad pest.

You see this repeatedly throughout history that we can correct a complex system, which is nature. Of course, that's what geoengineering is and that's why it's like destroying our forests

because they're spraying you know 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

so and you know people talk about contrails and you know that's that being geoengineering it's not and most of these these stations are ground based but it's very expensive from a scientific and engineering perspective 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 geoengineering 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 in space all the time. And a lot of this is either not classified or secret, but it's not exactly visible either.

So, you know, who knows what people are shooting up in this case. 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 two reasons, one to protect the company. And also because I wanted to maintain my security clearance and good standing. And 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. And I've, you know, 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. And we never get anything out of the relationship, it seems. It's been a very abusive, one-way relationship from the Chinese. and I knew this going back to my military days and I had actually been invited to do other collaborative work with the Chinese and other institutions and places I've worked sort of tied to national security and I always stayed away from it because I never saw any benefit to it

and well if the government wants to the US government wants to fund this or this entity wants to find that's fine I can protest by just not being a part of it so you leave EcoHealth Alliance after a few years than COVID happens. Yes. And when it happens, everyone thinks I'm sort of the crazy one. And how this actually transpires is I was working at Jewel Labs, E-Secret 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, you know, I catch wind of this virus spreading around the planet. It was very obvious that people on the West Coast were becoming sick. and I want to say late November, December, 2019. You know, another really weird thing happens. So I'm making more money than I've ever made 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 assistant director there, for deputy director. I can't remember where 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 D.H. Department of Homeland 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, you know, 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, you know, I thought it was sort of odd that she had contacted me on my brand new San Francisco area phone, cell phone. So I had a new phone number because I relocated and I wanted San Francisco area code. I didn't think too much of it. And I couldn't figure out that why she wanted me to come be the director of this biological program. I'd been trying to get away from national security intelligence type work for

several years and I kept on, keep on getting dragged back into it, it seemed. And I said, you know, thanks, Amy. I'm not really interested in this right now. I'm making a lot of money. This pays far more than what, you know, DARPA can pay me. I want to keep what I'm doing. She's like, well, you know, 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 a scientist. And that's very, you know, common in the scientific community, the two-body problem. And go, go home, talk, speak with Emily about it. And, you know, give me a call back to you. 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 move to dc to have you know fed jobs and go work in that environment and my wife had previously worked at u sda and she didn't want to go back to it and like call up amy next day you know thank you uh you know for for contact 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 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, you know, if you change your mind in the next few weeks, we'd really like to have you. You'd 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 DARPA had held. a contest, or I want to say not so much a contest, but put out a RFP request for proposals

related to something called preempt, which was preventing emerging infectious disease threats. And one of the proposals was something called diffuse from my former employer called EcoHealth Alliance, which was basically the recipe for SARS-CoV-2, which was done in partnership with the Wuhan Institute Virology. So, you know, I'm sort of 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. And...

Which is tell the truth in public. Tell the truth in public about what the origin of SARS COVID2 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 kid would go off the rails. I actually believed the information I was seeing, which I think was a Piot

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 were making it seem. Well, I believed it, too. Oh, absolutely. Well, they had portrayed it, though, that something that in epidemic. You mean in like 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? Like, this thing is going to kill everyone, like 80, 90 percent of the population could die from this disease. That's how they were portraying this. Right. It turns out that that number was much lower. And somewhere in the, you know, in the percentage category, not the 70, 80 or 90 percent. So I went real quick from thinking that this was going to be the thing that could, you know, cripple society. to being, I'm not wearing a mask in public. Right.

But my behavior in 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 in 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's supply worth of MREs. I start stockpiling other things, some ammunition, make a plan, and my wife and I land in the UP in Michigan. Everyone, you know, sort of thought it was crazy for doing this. And next thing you know, everybody wants to come visit me during the lockdowns. They said, they said you were right about everything. And, you know, I live this too, yes.

In the back of my mind, though, I'm thinking about constantly that, and I know that Eco Health Alliance had been engaged in this gain of function work at EcoHealth or excuse me, at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And I'm like, a bat coronavirus emerging in Wuhan and, you know, I'm watching this, these, watching the news and the TV at, you know, through 2020. And they're like, oh, it was a, you know, a pain. 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 and the specific wet market in China is a seafood market. That's why it's called a wet market.

Yes. But, you know, Western Americans are... It's not for mammals. It's for creatures from the sea. People in the United States have a very myopic view of, you know, the world typically. Oh, I know. 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 kind of place I'd go buy groceries. You know, other than New York City, a very nice, very nice place. So I'm like, none of this is adding up. And, you know, you're watching the story evolve. And next thing you know, my former boss, Dr. Peter Dasick, 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 mean, 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 mean, I knew all the players in this big thing. I mean, I had been groomed since I was a PhD student to be a Dr. Anthony Fauci replacement or that type of person. So, I mean, 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. I'm watching this all play out. And I just can't believe it. And it's the kind of thing where I'm yelling at my computer screen in private. like they put you know they put fucking dr dask in charge of like 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 callous entrenched about really really going on can you explain that a little bit what does that mean well 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 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 U.S. government, but multiple entities, the pharmaceutical industry, the big companies that

back all these different things, special interests 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, you know, 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, you know,

a naturally emerging disease from the wet market. So, you know, 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 caught. 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. The Hutzpah required to do something like that. You take not just

like some random guy, but the guy who's responsible and you start telling everyone he's the savior, wow man that the human brain a normal person is bewildered by that is thrown off balance by that well at least in my life when we were discussing this a little bit at breakfast the more of you see of this trickery the more that you're exposed and then they actually talk about this in the psychological research oftentimes the the more aware you become of a phenomenon the more you see it and then once you start saying you can't stop seeing it and that's how they say you know people become conspiracy theorists because they see see the conspiracy theorists and well that's why very few young people, I think this is changing fast, but my whole life, like young people always

bought the story. Then you meet guys in their 70s, particularly people who'd work for the government. And I've known a lot of those who would get more conspiracy-minded as they aged. Have you ever noticed this? Oh, absolutely. Yeah. And that's just... Why is that? Well, experience. Exactly. And 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. And I used to be one of those people. Oh, yeah. Oh, tell me about it. I made it to my late 30s with that, you know, but mid 30s. But anyway, wow, that's wild. So you're sitting up at the UP with your scientist's wife watching this stuff on CNN going, you must be like going bonkers watching this. Well, internally, and I was working on a startup company and I was

distracted by other things. And, you know, because I was in the UP, this was only via social media or the news so i'm pretty detached from it um 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 lincoln at the time and other social media posts that i could i needed to be contained in some way and what sort of things were you saying i 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 naturally 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 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, you know, the timeline of COVID is happening or occurring, you know, so we're going through the lockdowns.

They're trying to get the vaccine operation warp 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 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 who 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 in those so-called qualified experts, I thought I was better than them. Yeah. And I look at it 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 wage back against the population via social media and other channels and how I did has been completely successful. I was, I mean, 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 the people are tied to it, you know, are still trying to make the panglin or natural emergency argument. It's funny. I went on the eco-health, I think EcoHealth Alliance is gone or sort of gone now.

Defunct, yeah. 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, you know,

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 that 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, the public it's also hilarious it's a great newspaper in certain ways and so it's the and same with daily mail exactly the same and they sort of low you into believing them because they've got a sense of humor and they cover great stories and they're sort of vaguely right wing but actually it's a vector for 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 it is but i think the new york post and daily mail are 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. And they'll, I mean, 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, well, the timeline starting to get a little foggy, this has been ongoing saga. I think it was in late 2021 or mid to late 2021. I'm contacted by some journalists. So journalists are trying to contact me and ask me questions because they figure they're probably wondering, who's the tough guy? Does he know what he's talking about? They're probably trying to frame me is a crazy. Miranda Devine contacts me a pretty prominent journalist and asks me on the telephone where she should look for more records related to the scan 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 think 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 secondhand 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 and things that had been submitted. And I don't know

if this is related or not, but a week or two after I have 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 U.S. And the primary sponsor, the primary company engaging this work was EcoLoth 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. And I started making the argument to people. know this is very real. Darpa does business differently than other government agencies. They use a single High Myers 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 and material. They only typically want a one or two

page proposal. And I tell people, like, 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 is fake. For those who aren't familiar, we just tell viewers what DARPA is. Yeah, so DARPA is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. 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 or entities that's federally funded that it has, the Internet. So everything on the internet was developed by 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 and you start pulling up the tables of information, eventually you get to something that says ARPANET, and every communication that we do. So they make the most sophisticated, sophisticated stuff in the world. So it's a Pentagon funded research lab, basically. Yes. Well, not necessarily just a research lab.

I'd call it more of it. It covers a program area or series of approach. 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? Yeah. Three years. They have a short, 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 like go to the grocery store very strange right if you live up 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 the most rural place in the lower 48 by yes by population density So when you're getting followed in the UP, you know it. Oh, absolutely. I mean, so the house, the pandemic, you know, prepper house that we purchased, it's 180 acres. It's completely off grid.

Our driveways, 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. And because there are mines in the air, there's blasting. stuff going on nobody would care um so that's that's where i live so when you go to the gas

station or you go into town you know 40 minute drive and you have someone follow you have a couple vehicles follow you it's very strange and i get on it was twitter then before x and my my profile becoming elevated so one of the first people to get in contact me was brett wrenstein dr Brett Weinstein, another Prya Yannick, they start reaching out to me. So the people who were outspoken and skeptics around all the things 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 MRA vaccines are causing cancer. So anyways, I have this great conversation. And all of a sudden, all the, I feel that I can sense the pressure. you know being applied and mounting you know from being followed you know as weird as that is and because of my 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 you know i'm dr andrew huff i'm a former top secret clearance that worked at this environment i'm being tailed because you're supposed to you sign documents saying that you know if you report any uh if you have any strange behavior the rest of your life of

being tailed or you know hacking surveillance reported 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 entities so some federal entity government agency could be there the state police the sheriff's department I now know for a fact that it was the state police my sheriff's department in Marquette County and the FBI all working together in hindsight and probably also with the department defense and the CIA which is more difficult to prove but you can sort of see ties and tendrils into that. So that aside, so I'm being followed, they're listening to my communications, all of this is sort of 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, you know, Amazon or wherever you get them these days. It's difficult to defend it against that advanced persistent threat. So you're 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, you know, entities.

and organizations, and I try to investigate myself the source of those hacks, and I actually know 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's 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 U.S. 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, covering in the counter. It changed one of my bird dogs. So this dog was actually one of the more. Sherman short hair pointer? Yeah, so large female, about 70 pounds, a large for that breed. They attacked your dog. Yeah, they tased the dog and it changed her behavior. She became more timid.

She actually should be sort of aggressive for a GSP. And so anyways, yeah, they tased my dog. They tampered with my vehicles on numerous occasions. And this just didn't happen in the UP. This would happen when I go other places. So if I'd travel for work, say I'd go to, you know, Wisconsin, Green Bay, California. They'd tamper with my vehicles there and do, you know, really silly stuff, like psychologically. So they might just like buckle your seatbelt 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, you know, but they were trying to apply all the pressure that they could to make my life miserable. I have times periods where my credit credits might not work. You show up to a gas station and try to run at 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 on I don't want to say what type of car I have on your show but a newer vehicle that has like automated driving

like assisted driving capabilities that had been taken over at low speed where I couldn't control it and now I'm sort of in of the mindset I'm like oh gee we have self-driving cars and they would actually it always had let me answer that question no yeah it's the end of human autonomy right and so you should have 1987 and Chevrolet Silveradoes 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've thought about that. And so it's always this battle whether or not we should have these technologies. And here's the thing I want to point out. They didn't do these things when I was driving at high speed. It happened at the same place in my driveway systematically where they were doing it to mess with me.

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 you're a patriotic American, served your country, fought,

and was wounded in Iraq, you know, and for your government to be doing this to you because you're telling the truth is really kind of like the end. I mean, that that could happen. Yeah, well, I took the attitude of, I can beat these guys, and I'm better than they are,

and I'm smarter than they are. So it just became a game to me. And I just went, played the game and I played the game and I outsmarted 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 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. 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. So to this day? To this day. And I still have them. Why? I mean, I guess it's probably someone from law enforcement.

That's what, 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 individual, and I'm not the first U.S. government scientist to go through this, it's well documented that the person they blamed for the bacillus anthracis attacks after 9-11. So you remember the anthrax mailings? Do I remember? Yeah.

Yeah. So they pin that to a guy by the name of Dr. Bruce Ivins. Well, first it was Dr. Stephen Hadfield. Yes. Yeah. And then it was Dr. Bruce Ivans. And they ran a operation on him, which was like Co-Intel Pro, to make him crack. And eventually he kills himself.

He can't handle the pressure. Well, they ran the same type of operation on me. I didn't crack. I hate to go far afield because this is an amazing strong. 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, you know, to the newsrooms of a bunch of media organizations. I actually got one at my house. So it was a big deal. This was right after that.

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

Yeah. And so Dr. Bruce, I haven't worked in that laboratory. He worked on vaccine technology and the spores, which are weaponized, to be dispersed. And 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 antheracus, it's too big of an agent, it just falls to the ground, it sits. So to weaponize it, you want to make it so it stays dispersed and... Light and fluffy. Exactly.

And so Dr. Bruce Evans 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 say that someone engaged in the false flagging of the anthrax attacks to promote the anthrax vaccine, potentially. I mean, that's one theory that's out there. I personally believe from analyzing all the different evidence that Dr. Bruce Evans 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 kind of person. I don't see this person all of a sudden taking the sport. wars of his laboratory and then mailing mailing them to people. This could have been done to continue the biodefense program around Bacillus anthracis as one possible scenario. So anyways, I mean, we're sort of off track here.

So there is no, because no one was ever charged with it. And he, is I 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, like, 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. So I'll keep those. 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 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, you know, in private afterward, they'll tell you, you know, who I think probably is involved. But these would be government. 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 talked by, uh, top. by Dr. Mike Oster homewound, who and I, he and I do not see I die 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 U.S. government or? Well, they're not really run by the U.S. 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. I got 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. or certainly understand how people talk themselves into that. And I don't, it's not prima facie insane or evil. What I find obviously insane and evil is the lying about it. And so, you know, 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 Nulen, architect of the current disaster in Ukraine, that she was worried about the biolabs there. So she said that on camera. So, okay, all right, you said it, honey. And I played the tape and was immediately attacked by everybody, all the other, you know, CNN and all the other Intel community controlled news outlets as like a conspiracy wacko. And there are no, there are no biolabs in Ukraine? What are you talking about?

Same. Like, what is that? I don't understand how the Biden administration handled the messaging and the communications around that. So 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 secret. 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. And actually, this is published information by the Department of Defense and other, the State Department, other agencies involved. And you can go look at CBAP maps and see where we have this information. Or you can play the game 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? Like to me, as a non-scientist but a student of human nature, that's a tell that something's bad going on. Like, why would you lie about that? Well, I think the Biden administration was completely incompetent. on all these areas. And 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, right? And so she probably couldn't articulate anything that would be the truth without putting herself in risk of being perjuring herself. Right. So I think she gave the answer to not perjure herself, not knowing what she didn't know. stupidity is often

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 trained us yeah of course well that's what honest people do is just tell the truth but I just thought it was interesting that the media cooperated with the cover-up

in that's and many a million others of course but like why what is that well that was all part of the psychological operation because remember this 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 turn out to be true it undermines the credibility of the main narrative that they're trying to set which was COVID emerged from market like an even bigger and dumber question which is like why would the U.S. 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, you know, we're in a war against

China, a 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 bioweapons lab? Well, the government's people, first of all. You know, we always refer to it as the government, But you work in Washington, D.C. and in this space and any program area that a person could be affiliated with has people running it. Those people don't want to be held accountable. No, that's 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 or have relationships to execute on that operation.

plan. 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 of 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. And here's just a quick story. And maybe we'll cut this in differently. but one of the funny things that they did was that it had been a sort of really stressful summer of working on my book writing it because of the hacks and 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, you know, 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, you know... I hope you flashed them. I walk around probably naked all the time. That's weird. Because I'm, you know, former Army infantryman.

I don't care who sees me naked. So, and I live out in the middle of nowhere, so I'll just go outside naked sometimes. But anyways, we're in Chicago. And, you know, 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, you know, because this is the first time where I've actually been able to, you know, confront these people. the room goes dead silent. So what do I do? I go over to the fire door, which is right next to this hotel room, was up against the stairwell, and we're on the third floor, there on the

fourth, and I make a quick decision to sort of 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 you know which way they're going to go down the fire escape or at the end of the building the only other way they're going to go they're going to go down 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 you 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. So I said, but I'm up on the fifth floor and they're coming out on the fourth and I'm looking down to 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 at the music festival or bars or wherever they were following us around all day. And they said, no, we haven't seen anyone. They're, you know, it looks sort of like they're sweating. And I go over to the, I start laughing. I go over to the desk of the lobby and say, hey, what's your name? I get your phone number. I'm going to have my attorneys call. You're going to get a copy of the surveillance footage of of these guys. And I'm like, I'm going to come back. And 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 like run around the bushes around my house, you know, to like, you know, freak me out. And or thinking that they were freaking me out. And I laughed at most of this. So I called 911 and report the trespassers. And I'm working in my garage on some, you know, project. And they're playing music and sounds from their phone, like, trying to, like, get me to come out and, like, run after him or something. So anyways, uh, 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 like you get shut 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 a person's cell phone and the phone calls made. I mean, I know. Are any of these people ever punished?

The drone operators, the state cop. No. So these people haven't been published. 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 how to what extent. There was another person. I actually witnessed one of the state police officers in my house through a black, through a plate glass window. I was out working on the property. He was on my computer trying to destroy evidence, I think. He lives in the town in the road. So much of this came from the state police, which is the governor, Governor Whitmer administration, totally corrupt history of working with the FBI to harass. Totally corrupt person, yes. And 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 has dangerous.

That's, I mean, this is. And no one was ever held. accountable. What about your former co-workers at Eagle 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. That's the most perfect thing I've ever heard. Okay. It was either that of the Atlantic counselor at Georgetown University. I knew it was one of the three. Okay. Funny. So the other vice presidents, Dr. Epstein or Dr. Oval, I'm not sure where they are. I know Dr. Dasick's trying

to get something new going, which is basically, it sounds like sort of the same thing. And, you know, I understand why there have been a series. Has Dr. Dasik ever faced any penalty at all for participating in this? No. And the best part is that what's crazy about all of 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 grilling. And they have the part where they go through, basically he's denying that any of this gain of function, his involvement, and he's fighting back. And then, you know, 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

question, they actually asked Dr. Dasick whether or not he is 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 not, it's on the official record that he was working with the intelligence like me. That's craziness. And nobody talks about that. You know, this is, 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 Virology. In my opinion, probably not. Probably not. So it's so often. And I get this question. It's like when I worked at the National Labor. 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 swept 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 U.S. government officials and Dr. Dasik visiting that laboratory,

they would just take around to them like, oh, this is our microbiology laboratory. This is our, you know, 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. You know, 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 lengths 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 sort of backfilled after that.

Was this something else? Like, 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 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 accident, accidental release 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 and then spread it unknowingly to the world. So that is, I think, the scenario which has the most favor publicly and among experts who are now committed 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 conclusively identify 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 through blood donation programs globally so what we do is we go to those blood banks look at old samples or we look at other tissues or samples they've been collected 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 evolves so rapidly you can actually look at the phylogenetic tree to see you know where in time was the sample and you'd follow that back then with the location information you're obtaining of positive hits where the sample positive samples were found to eventually trace you back to the origin and that study's 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 of organizations and the US military that could look at their own genetic blood bank samples to sort of 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 defense or the defense medical uh agencies would would would do that so these are questions that that could be answered and they haven't been answered and i have more thoughts and opinions to what has transpired uh 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 then investigation should be in the form of using the UCMJ process through the Department of Defense because Dr. Anthony Fauci Dr. Dasick, Ralph Barrick, all these people were essentially working on a defense program. They're working with DOD. It falls under UCMG authority legally. Not many people know that. It's not just people. Uniform coded military justice. Yes. So people who are working with the DOD, whether they're a civilian or government employee on a project, project diffused, are subject to UCMJ. That's where the investigation should happen. It shouldn't happen at the Department of Justice. I believe that Secretary Heggseth has the leadership to execute this properly. And if the

investigation warrants, then criminal charges could be brought under UCMGA in a classified setting. So basically a classified trial, which exists, then set a time period of five to ten years to release the results of that criminal trial publicly. Obviously, if someone's found guilty and they're 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, um, opponents of this, now is not the time to release that information publicly. Because the world sits on the cusp of a global war. Exactly. And I'm actually sort of following our leaders here. There have been a series of...

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 that, I think that's kind of a window into the way that you think, which is in a restrained and responsible way. Well, thank you. And that opinion or that belief and that process sort of 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 FOIA 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 conversations, like direct messages. And we have some friends that are, you know, friends of a friend kind of thing. So I believe her heart's in the right place. I can, I can verify that through, you know, a decade of knowing her well. And she's one the only famous people I've

ever met, maybe the only famous person I've ever met who not only didn't get, he doesn't own a home because she's never made any money at all. Because that's the last thing her mind. So who else can you say that about? Not many people. That's right. And so looking at her leadership right now and her office's leadership and their response to these FOIA 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 elected and she was nominated into that position and eventually became the director.

So looking at that, I think they're making the same kind of 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 panglin lie? Absolutely. Are there?

Yes. Well, if you go over to the other Twitter, blue, whatever, it's called Blue Sky, or I think, I can't remember the name of 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. There 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. Ebright from Rutgers University, who I admire. and respect. He's fighting this, the good fight every day on social media as an old, old season 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 natural, or excuse me, the lab, 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 know, 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. And I'm using air quotes around the word doctor, but Dr. Peter Hotez, for example, a Vax pusher of longstanding, is he, just to name one name, is he pushing the penguin 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. Hotez 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 more directly linked back to the origin story than other scientists in the vaccine. Really? Yes.

In what way? I forget that he has some kind of either publication record with scientists there or collaboration of research, I believe. Yeah. Well, he's, yeah. it's interesting you really feel like you don't know your country very well when i mean i knew people who believed dr peter hotes and i thought to myself how could this i mean this is so clearly you know 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 those the truth led to division i guess maybe it's a better word to put it but

anyway but why in general leaving hotes out of it why would a vax pusher not want to tell the truth about the origin of the virus. Simply that Gana Function technology is used for virology in vaccine development. And MRNA is a huge portfolio of new vaccine technology development. Thank you. Okay. That's the answer.

And there's 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, large, 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 in the law for MRNA technology. I do not think that it's going to be the future vaccine technology.

And frankly, I'm not so concerned anymore with the old way of thinking that the emerging infectious disease threat that we should be concerned about are old world diseases. So bacillus antheracus being weaponized, for example, a coronavirus being weaponized, gain of function technology has evolved within the last two to three years at such a rapid pace. The future threat we need to be mitigating against and protecting against is actually synthetic pathogens and 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? So, but if it's, if it behaves independently and it's self-replicating, then aren't those the criteria for life? Well, that's a whole philosophical debate. And, 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 a 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. 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. And 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... Text, we can the code and I can make the virus. And I believe we'll be there in the near future with bacteria. 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 Borlaug program at USDA, where they use this for pest control, and you could target, make it so it was very specific,

the synthetic cell 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 is sort of on the, 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 our allies. But this synthetic threat is rapidly emerging. So that's the biotechnology said.

Now if you take a look at it, and I know I've been watching your show, recent episodes, AIs have 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 four to five year horizon. And

the AI will be programmed into the microcircuits systems of the nanotechnology. It's a fact. I mean, like, you're going to use the best software, the best programs you can get onto

a basically a nanocopputer within that cell, which does the programming. This might sound like crazy. science fiction to a lot of people. People would 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, to negotiate a new biological treaty. I just want to apologize in public for every moment I've defended, like, our economic system because, like, 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 is a classic example. A firearm in a good person's hand is a tool to defend and protect yourself, your family against tyranny. Any evil person's hand? Yeah, nuclear power, nuclear bombs. I get it. Yeah.

But, you know, 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 it's 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 at this. But what I'm saying is there's no stopping it. 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 prophylactics. And you can engage in the gain of function technology, bio-weapon 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 and today's climate, changing. So we blow up the Nord Stream pipeline. There's no, I mean, the basis of international

treaty of course is trust and there's none so like no more international treaties well i hope i hope you're 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 like what does that mean sure so the marriage of nanotechnology to AI means that the AI, or excuse me, the nanotechnology will have swarm-like capabilities. So people or the general world is probably more familiar with swarm technology around drones. They're using this and they're testing this and they're trying to fill these rapid swarm 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 swarm technology. Yep. And that's the civilian, you know, this is cool tech application. But there's actually a much more sinister application of that same technology for defense, dual-use technology. So imagine that these pathogens are like these drones and you see them operate. AI will control the swarm 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 its. 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 swarm. 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, Yes. 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 hull 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. with the submarine in some way. In space, 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 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 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. So, no, I'm just being super dark, but honest. More difficult probably. Well, unless they had some kind of specific. No, I'm half kidding, sort of. 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. 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 populations 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, where one was more heavily impacted than the other. And that was, that was Sephardic Ashkenazi. Yes. And that was, 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 game of function technology.

And with synthetic, full synthetics, what I'm saying is you can make this so specific is that if I got your DNA like off a, you know, 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 get a DNA sample from two of your, a couple of your relatives, so I knew what your family tree partially look like. Machine learning is very good at actually random forest and tree decision making. You can do a lot of complex AI behind this to figure out and make predictions that AI could about what your family tree looked like and have the disease travel through your family line. Now, this is, 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. And 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 that's in health care applications of it are there. And they're going to be, they will be extremely profitable. imagine that you said like I you know 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 and like I say in theory because things always have side effects of course and 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. Well, 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 you can't find out 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 warning signal is the most important aspect of defending against future emerging threats. And if we 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 mean, I could talk forever about that. They're not teaching ethics to people like me. the doctor in five years as a result i mean there's yeah as corrupt as every other institution wow that that what a heavy conversation that was thank you where can people if people are interested in finding out more people with the stronger stomach and stouter heart than i have want to know

more about the last 10 minutes of our conversation where do you write about this well i've started to and i'm not sure how it's been received i've published it on on substack i've done it published a little bit on on X and then also on LinkedIn and it's it's not very I don't think people are catching on and actually I just solicited proposals to DARPA and a few other places and saying hey we should be looking at this and I already know for a fact that they've been thinking at it and they've been dabbling and they put a little money into it so I'm working I'm actually actively working on this if you want to for the little the limited time that I or the few things that I do publish about this I put it on X and AG

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 would 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 research professors at leading universities within the next five years, teaching this to P8, 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. 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. And to your point earlier, it's the people behind it. Well, that's it. And maybe we need to do a better out. 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 preying on their students. And it's a vicious cycle. And I mean, what do I mean by praying on them?

Well. Yeah, not just sexually anymore. Not sexually. No, that's the least of the problems. In the Ph.D. world, it's very common that research professors basically steal their students' work and have them, you 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? 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 revivals to do that nothing short of that is going to work that's my view that's what i'm hoping for um because i feel like we are on the cusp of like true darkness i agree uh and i think about these things a lot and you know scientists we have people ask me what i do i'm sitting there staring out the window and i'm like i'm working And they're like, you know, well, I'm thinking through problems. And people often wonder, well, what do PhDs do?

And we sit there and we think about these things. And we try to cope up with answers. And we try not to waste any of our brainpower on things that don't matter. And I don't know if it's with a full religious, if it's a fully religious aspects, at least within the scientific community. Because 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 are some of them I should say are great and fantastic people at least at a minimum for them to to view themselves in the greater context of what it all means and try to have positive I guess a positive force on the world through what they're doing but there's no positive or negative for an atheist I mean it doesn't there's no hierarchy of value that rooted anything other than preference so 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 so you should never allow atheists to have this

kind of power um 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 you know so that can't be allowed uh dr huff thank you amazing conversation it's going to affect my sleep thank you thank you We've got a new website we hope you will visit. It's called new commission now.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, there's a visa to go to the United States to America.

A foreign national was caught celebrating as the World Trade Center fell and later said he was in New York, quote, to document the event. How did you know there would be an event to document in the first place? Because he had foreknowledge. 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 U.S. government learned the name of that investor, but never released it.

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? Oh, I was no one ever punished for it. 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 truth 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. And if you want that, go to new commission now.com to add your name to our petition. We're not getting paid for this, we're doing this because we really mean it. Newcommission now.com. You know!

Thank you.