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

25:49And that's why a lot of Americans are turning to Burna. It's a proudly American company. Burna makes self-defense launchers that hundreds of law enforcement departments trust. They've sold over 600 ,000 pistols, mostly to private citizens who refuse to be empty-handed. These pistols, and I have one, fire rock-hard kinetic rounds or tear gas rounds and peppered 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 BurnaByRNA.com or your local sportsman's warehouse to get your stay.

26:29Burna.com. Hey there. It's Wayfair here, where delivery and setup are as easy as a few taps on your phone. You're relaxing in an old hammock, scrolling Wayfair's app, when you spot it, a brand new patio set. Next thing you know, Wayfair delivers it right to your patio and sets it up. Oh, you need a new grill too? All right, Wayfair's got you covered. With Wayfair's room of choice delivery and fast expert setup on qualifying orders, life gets a little easier. Visit Wayfair.com or the Wayfair app. Wayfair, every style, every home. When you're 7-Eleven's hottest fire chicken sandwich, people think you're intense.

27:04Well, yeah, I'm hot! Oh, yeah, intense. Want to see if you can handle the heat? Then try me. With pickles or spicy mayo and jalapenos. Oh, and it's all just$4.99. That's a deal almost as hot as I am. Almost? Sweets? No. Spicy? See for yourself. $4.99 and only at 7-Eleven. Follow up through 825-26. Participating stores only while supplies last. Just store for full terms. Yeah, again, I don't have any background information, so you could tell me anything, but everything you're saying sounds right to me, just based on what I have seen. Can I just back up a tiny bit and ask some practical questions about what EcoHealth Alliance was doing?

27:45So you said, before you got to the portion where they were acting as an Intel asset, which sounds right, you said they were compiling, collecting a library of viruses from around the world. How does that work? How do you collect a virus in Sudan, for example, any country? How do you do that? Sure. 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 consul for 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.

28:23You 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, try to gauge. 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.

28:55Right. So we're not giving money to terrorists. That didn't happen at Equal Health Alliance. It did not happen. It did not happen. I found out about that after the fact as well. But we try to figure out who these people are. And then if they're capable, oftentimes it's universities, either the ag school or at a foreign university, the veterinary school or human medical center. Then we formulate the contract. We send them the cash. and then they would either go out and collect the samples or we would travel or have our personnel travel to go collect the samples. So if we're talking about bats, it depends what species you're dealing with.

29:27If 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 that 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.

30:10Okay. 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.

30:53So 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. Well, first of all, you don't even know at this point whether there's a new deadly virus present in the sample. In the batshit or saliva. Yeah, in the batshit or the saliva. You have no clue. Once it gets back to the United States, then it goes to, at least at Equal Alliance, it would go to Ian Lipkin's laboratory at Columbia University, where he was a specialist in, he's a pretty well-known viral epidemiologist with really good lab chops.

31:31And another doctor who worked with us named Simon Anthony would work with him to isolate, 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 Baric's laboratory where he would continue the work. Down at Chapel Hill. Chapel Hill and do the gain-of-function work. It's just, can I just approach this from an autistic perspective? So what you're saying is there are like people around the world in bat caves in some faraway country sending potentially novel and dangerous viruses to New York City.

32:12Like all the time and people are not even aware of this. There's a huge, I wouldn't say huge, but I mean a non-trivial amount of these types of samples being shipped around the world globally. And if they're properly contained and packaged, it's really not that much of a risk. And actually, Dr. Ralph Baric developed some of these methods of how to send what's called a chimeric virus on a sheet of paper and envelope, which is low risk. The bigger risk becomes when you start to clone or replicate that agent at scale. Human medicine, public health, epidemiology, transmission risk, and how you look at this, You have to have a substantial quantity of a virus, which is a substance mixed in the air or be exposed to it to become infected with it.

32:57Because you have an immune system that works. And sometimes you get exposed to these things and you don't even know it because your immune system fights it off. 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 on gain of 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.

33:35government 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 and 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, I think there are a lot of, you know, rigorous, responsible scientists, but, you know, people make mistakes. I mean, and 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.

34:15And 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 some whatever probability or consequence of risk, but it's always the human making a decision or behavior or 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 EcoHealth Alliance was compiling a library of these viruses. They'd be stored in one place? Well, yes, they had a digital library at EcoHealth Alliance.

34:51And then there's other systems that the U.S., or I should say, not only the United 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 80 C centigrade freezers as fast as we could, or as many as we could afford and storing those at Columbia University and other laboratories where these things go in the freezer and they sit. But 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.

35:28We thought this through when we started this podcast a year ago and we decided we're never advertising anything that we or people on our staff don't use. Period. We're only partnering with companies that we agree with and endorse actually in our personal lives. 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.

36:06Let's say there's an EMP attack or civil disturbance. You don't know what could happen in the future. You are prepared and you are protecting your family with Last Country Supply products. So head to lastcountrysupply.com to shop for our new collection, Bulk Up Now. There is no scenario where you will regret being prepared. I get so many headaches every month. It could be chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting four hours or more. Botox, on a botulinum toxin A, prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine. It's not for those who have 14 or fewer headache days a month.

36:42Prescription Botox is injected by your doctor. Effects of Botox may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. Allerge your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness can be signs of a life-threatening condition. Patients with these conditions before injection are at highest risk. Side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue, and headache. Allergic reactions can include rash, welts, asthma symptoms, and dizziness. Don't receive Botox if there's a skin infection. Tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions, including ALS Lou Gehrig's disease, myasthenia gravis or Lambert-Eaton syndrome, and medications, including botulinum toxins, as these may increase the risk of serious side effects.

37:19Why wait? Ask your doctor. Visit BotoxChronicMigraine.com or call 1-800-44-BOTOX to learn more. Everyone knows that unexplainable it factor, that smile that lights up a room, that wow. Well, it doesn't happen by itself. There's chemistry behind the charisma. Colgate Optic White Pro Series toothpaste removes 15 years of deep-set stains when you brush twice daily for two weeks. How? The clinically proven formula is powered by Colgate's hydrogen peroxide complex. It works at the molecular level to gently dissolve stains deep within the enamel where your brush can't reach. It's proof that daily routine can be remarkable.

37:54That's the science of wow. Colgate Optic White. What's the security like at a lab like that? 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, me a biosecurity, biosafety expert, you could get into most university laboratories. They would... 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 those guys actually look like.

38:30Who, the scientists? 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? Are all the laboratories the same? I mean, I think many of the BSL-3 or 4, 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 Barak and his laboratory, he's had a series of leaks at his laboratory over years, you know, where people, their employees have gotten sick.

39:14And 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. And 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 a transmission risk to the community. So that's just the very nature of how people behave, how people work in the laboratory, how human biology and physiology works. I mean, this is the nature of the beast. And it's very difficult to prevent those types of risks, I guess, to the community and the greater population.

39:53No, this is why we have Lyme disease, which I got. So yes, no, I'm very aware of that. And I think everyone's aware of that. So with that in mind, gain of function is inherently dangerous, correct? I've always been against it. It actually divides the scientific community or it used to pre-COVID. but I think there's probably more scientists and experts against gain of function. It seems like certainly the general population is against it. Not all gain of function technology is bad. For example, insulin is made from a form of gain of function, and there are many diabetic people and they require insulin.

40:28Now, if we're talking about gain of function research on pathogens which have pandemic potential, it's a no-brainer. It's a stupid idea, and this is why it splits the scientific community. So one camp says, there's no use to this. I don't understand why we're doing it in the first place. Therefore, we shouldn't do it. The other camp argues, well, if we can predict how these viruses will mutate, then we can develop countermeasures, vaccines, or drugs to counter the threat before it emerges. and that opinion and i've always held this belief that 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 yeah and if you look back through human history it's always humans trying to correct nature which have failed the introduction of the brain brown snake and guam i mean there's all these things where they've uh that was a hitchhiker scenario, but where they try to introduce some kind of predator to eliminate some kind of bad pest.

41:31You 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 can't, 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 being geoengineering, it's not.

42:04And most of these stations are ground-based, but it's very expensive. From a scientific and engineering perspective, if you were going to launch a large-scale geoengineering 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 larger 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 into space all the time. And a lot of this is either not classified or secret, but it's not exactly visible either.

42:43So, you know, who knows what people are shooting up in space. Exactly. And there's a massive disinformation campaign against anyone who asks 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.

43:19And 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 at 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 U.S.

43:52government wants to fund this or this entity wants to fund, that's fine. I can protest by just not being a part of it. So you leave EcoHealth Alliance after a few years, then 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 Juul Labs e-cigarette company as a senior director of population health, living in the Bay Area. And because of what I did for a living and 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 in, I want to say, late November, December 2019.

44:39You know, another really weird thing happens. So I'm making more money than I've ever made in my life at this company. And I was very grateful for that. I was able to pay off all my debt. But I received a phone call from a woman by the name of Dr. Amy Jenkins, who works at ARPA H now. I think she's the assistant director there, deputy director. I can't remember what her title is. But I know Amy from years back. I actually met her while I was a PhD student at the University of Minnesota at a DH Department of 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.

45:15And 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 uh cell phone so I had a new phone number because I relocated and I wanted San Francisco area code I didn't I didn't think too much of it and I couldn't figure out the 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.

46:04And 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 home, talk, speak with Emily about it. And, you know, give me a call back tomorrow and let me know what you think. I said, okay, Amy, I'll do that.

46:33So went home and had a conversation with my wife. Hey, do you want to move back to the Beltway or move to D.C. to have, you know, Fed jobs and go work in that environment? And my wife had previously worked at USDA and she didn't want to go back to it. And I call up Amy and I say, you know, thank you, you know, for contacting me. At one point, this was in my career, this was actually my dream job to be running a, have a blank check from the Department of Defense to go develop all the coolest biotechnology world. I mean, seriously, I had dreamed of that job at one point. my life. I didn't want it.

47:03And so I told her no. And she's like, well, you know, if you change your mind, uh, in the next few weeks, we'd really like to have you call me anytime. And that was it. Well, okay. That, that phone call took place, uh, 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, a request for proposals related to something called PREEMT, 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 of Virology.

48:01So, 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 wouldn't 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-CoV-2 is. But going back on your timeline here, so I had limited information back then and I knew a pandemic was coming. So I told my wife, we need to get the heck out of the Bay Area as fast as possible. This could go off the rails. I actually believed the information I seen what we're seeing, which I think was a SIOP potentially targeted at, I mean, that this disease would be much more severe than it was.

48:46I'm not saying that it wasn't a severe disease. I mean, it wasn't as bad as they're making it seem meaning. Oh, I believed it too. Oh, absolutely. Well, they had portrayed it though that something that an 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 % of the population could die from this disease. That's how they were portraying this. It turns out that that number was much lower and somewhere in the percentage category, not the 70, 80, or 90%.

49:23So I went real quick from thinking that this was going to be the thing that could cripple society to being, I'm not wearing a mask in public. Right. But my behavior in action in early 2020, the first weeks, I started looking for a place in a remote area. So I'm considering Alaska, Maine, Northern Maine, Western Wyoming, or the UP of Michigan. My search criteria based on what I knew as an expert, you want to have access to an airport, transportation, high-speed internet, an hour drive from a major city center that's not too populated. Because if it's going to end the planet, it's going to kill everyone.

50:01You want distance from other people to break transmission cycles, at least so you can isolate yourself. so um i bought a year supply worth of mres i started stockpiling other things you know some ammunition make a plan and my wife and i land in the up of michigan everyone you know sort of thought i 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 um i'm thinking about constantly that and i know that eco health alliance had been engaged in this gain of function work at eco health 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 pangolin or it was the wet market.

50:58And I'm arguing on social media that that's 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 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 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.

51:31You 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 Daszak, 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. Morans. I had been out to dinner with him. I mean, I knew all the players in this big thing.

52:04I 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. So 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. Daszak 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 and cover-up.

52:35And I just started becoming more callous, entrenched about really going on. So how, 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 psyop? to give the perception that it's an independent person that's well-trusted within the wildlife community and the scientific community that we know what you're doing and can trust what we're saying. Because if you look at how the psychological operation was waged, and I'm not just saying the 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.

53:22He's thrilling. 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 the 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 caused one. It's really, yeah. Thank you for saying, I just wanted you to explain that a little more fully.

53:58I'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 chutzpah 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, and we were discussing this a little bit at breakfast, the more that you see of this trickery, the more that you're exposed. And then they actually talk about this in the psychological research.

54:33Oftentimes, the more aware you become of a phenomenon, the more you see it. And then once you start seeing it, you can't stop seeing it. Oh, I know. And that's how they say, you know, people become conspiracy theorists because they see the conspiracy theorists. Well, that's why very few young people, I think this is changing fast, but my whole life, like young people always bought the story. And then you meet guys in their seventies, 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.

55:04Yeah. And that's just - Why is that? Well, experience. Exactly. Experience and living life. 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 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.

55:40And, you know, because I was in the UP, this was only via social media or the news. So I'm pretty detached from it. What happens is in late 2021, the operation turns focused towards me because now I'm being, I think, viewed as a threat based on some of the things I put on LinkedIn at the time and other social media posts that I needed to be contained in some way. And what sort of things were you saying? So it was really Dr. Malone and I and a few other people who were trying to remain anonymous. I know who they are. We're just telling the truth. So, first of all, around the disease, that this was not a naturally emerging pathogen.

56:23And I could tell that it was not based on a number of facts, based on 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?

57:07Great 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 of very sophisticated scientific jargon, which very few people were qualified to understand or argue or debate.

57:54And 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, I wasn't fucking having it. I was, 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 where we're sitting today. I'm sitting here in this chair, speaking with you, telling you the truth. And I think my argument, the psychological operation I waged back against the population via social media and other channels and how I did has been completely successful.

58:27I 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 if people are tied to it, you know, are still trying to make the pangolin or a natural emergency argument. It's funny, I went on the EcoHealth, I think EcoHealth Alliance is gone or sort of gone now. It's defunct, yeah. It's defunct, yeah. But on their website, which still exists, I looked at it last night, they have an attack on you, of course, lacking all specifics. You're familiar with all this.

58:58But on it, they say, you know, Dr. Huff makes the totally unsubstantiated claim that this virus escaped 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 attribution error.

59:39I 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 to the public. It's also hilarious. It's a great newspaper in certain ways. And so it's the same with Daily Mail, exactly the same. And they sort of lull 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.

1:00:15but actually it's a vector for disinformation and for lying on behalf of the intel agencies. That's just what it is. That's most mainstream media, I think. It is, it is. But I think the New York Post and Daily Mail are at Wall Street Journal, also Fox News for sure. But they're more sinister because people believe them. Because, hey, it's Fox News. It's the Daily Mail. It's the New York Post, especially the New York Post. Everyone, headless body and topless bar, man. It's the coolest paper in the world. They wouldn't do that. Oh, they do it constantly. I agree. I mean, what do you do about it when you're a little man?

1:00:53I don't know. You tell the truth about it. That's all you can do. But, 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's starting to get a little foggy. This has been ongoing saga. I think it was in late 2021 or mid to late 2021. I was contacted by some journalists. So journalists are trying to contact me and ask me questions because they figure they're probably wondering, who's this tough guy?

1:01:25Does he know what he's talking about? They're probably trying to frame me as 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 this gain-of-function research. And because I had worked in this field for a year and knew all the players, I'm like, I don't know. you 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 of 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.

1:02:10Nobody'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, the 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 had that conversation, Major Murphy from the U.S.

1:02:46Marine 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 EcoHealth 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 haphazard. And I started making the argument to people, no, this is very real.

1:03:29DARPA does business differently than other government agencies. They use this thing called High Meyers 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. It could be full length of 100, 200 pages of material. They only typically want a one or two page proposal. And I tell people, I think 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.

1:04:03Let's ask you to pause for those who aren't familiar. We just tell viewers what DARPA is. Yeah, so DARPA is the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. It used to be ARPA before they added the D before. It's an 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 has the internet. So everything on the internet was developed by ARPA then, ARPANET. And if you are a tech nerd like me and you start digging down the DNS queries of how you search for information, you dig down, you start pulling up the tables of information, eventually you get to something that says ARPANET in every communication that we do.

1:04:41So they make the most sophisticated stuff in the world. So it's a Pentagon-funded research lab, basically. Yes. Well, not necessarily just a research lab. I'd call it more of a, it covers a program area or series of program areas where some of the research is done by private contractors, FFRDCs, basically anybody who can do the work. And they fund high risk, high value scientific R &D on short timelines. So you don't receive 10 years of funding. The Department of Defense rightfully so is what capability will this give us within a year or two? Yeah. Three years. They have a short, short horizon.

1:05:21It's no nonsense. And they want results. And they achieve them. Interesting. That's a great description from someone who's worked with them. So anyway, you have this conversation with Miranda Devine. And you now believe that conversation was monitored. And what happens next? Well, then I start, because my profile is increasing. And I'm starting to be actually followed by people out in the UP when I go to the grocery store. Very strange, right? The UP is the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. It's not actually near the state of Michigan, really. It's a geographic anomaly, but it is very lightly populated and extremely rural.

1:06:04It's one of the most rural places east of the Mississippi, if this is a fair description. Yes, it's actually the most rural place in the lower 48. by population density. So when you're getting followed in the UP, you know it. Oh, absolutely. So the house, the pandemic prepper house that we purchased, it's 180 acres. It's completely off grid. Our driveway is a mile long. And it's basically like a moat. There's a natural dense swamp on all four sides because the driveway is an old railroad grade. Oh, cool. Yeah, so it's very isolated. I joke I could throw a hand grenade off my step and nobody would notice.

1:06:44And because there are mines in the air, there's blasting and stuff going on. Nobody would care. So that's where I live. So when you go to the gas station or you go into town, you know, 40-minute drive and you have someone follow you, you have a couple of vehicles follow you, it's very strange. And I get on, it was Twitter then before X. It's hilarious. And my profile's becoming elevated. So one of the first people to get in contact with me was Brett Weinstein, Dr. Brett Weinstein. another person Jan Jeklik 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 him through the whole thing even through the vaccine technology and I think how it will cause cancer and look today where we are it's these mRNA vaccines are causing cancer so anyways I have this great conversation and all of a sudden I feel that I can sends the pressure, you know, being applied and mounting, you know, from being followed, you know, as weird as that is.

1:07:44And because I'm a former top secret clearance holder, I decided to go report this to the FBI. So I go to my local FBI field office and I say, you know, I'm Dr. Andrew Huff. I'm a former top secret clearance holder 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, if you have any strange behavior the rest of your life of being tailed or, you know, hacking surveillance, report it to the FBI. So I did. And 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.

1:08:23And 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 are any other undercover entities. So some federal entity, government agency, 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 of Defense and the CIA, which is more difficult to prove.

1:09:03But you can sort of see ties and tendrils into that. But 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 against that advanced persistent threat.

1:09:49So, 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 sources of those hacks. And I actually know, you follow the IP addresses of their VPN that they backdoor on 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.

1:10:31I 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 obtained in my house of people who broke into my house. They tased my dog. What? Yeah, they tased my dog during one of the break-ins. What else did they do? Actually? Yeah, actually. How do you know that? I mean, it leaves a big mark and a burn on the dog's neck. It was hiding, cowering in the counter. It changed one of my bird dogs. And so this dog was actually one of the more - German Shorthair Pointer? Yes. A large female, about 70 pounds, large for that breed.

1:11:05They attacked your dog. Yeah. Okay, that's when - Yeah, they tased the dog and it changed her behavior. She became more timid. She actually used to be 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 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 leave the car and then you come back to your car and everything's all skewed and they mess with stuff in it.

1:11:41So, 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 cards might not work. you show up to a gas station 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 of the mindset I'm like oh geez should we have self-driving cars and they would actually Let me answer that question.

1:12:26No. It's the end of human autonomy. And so... You should have 1987 Chevrolet Silverados with the five-speed manual transmission. You'll have to take me for a ride later. That's what I drive. Okay. Sorry. No, and I'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 at a low speed. And I actually brought one of the vehicles into the manufacturer to have it looked at.

1:12:59And 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. So. Well, this is all pretty distressing. And to think that you're a patriotic American, serve 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.

1:13:45I 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.

1:14:20And they failed on both accounts because the main thing is I had, I had documented everything that was happening. The license plates, the people following me, the fingerprints in my house. They're not my fingerprints. And the best part is I brought those fingerprints to the Marquette County Sheriff's department, brought them to the FBI. And I even had a referral from Sandia National Laboratories counterintelligence eventually to the FBI telling them to investigate this. And they refused to run the prints. have they ever run the prince no and this is where it gets really interesting so um 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 that's what it's probably a sheriff's department employee ah it could be uh someone politically that they uh used in the operation i mean if you look at how when when they want to target someone or individual, and I'm not the first U.S.

1:15:18government 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 pinned 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 Ivins. And they ran a operation on him, which was like COINTELPRO, 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 story, but you brought it up.

1:15:57So I'm going to have to ask you, give me the Cliff Notes version of what those anthrax attacks actually were, which for people who were not around then, killed a number of people, media employees. Anthrax-packed envelopes were sent to the newsrooms of a bunch of media organizations. I actually got one at my house. So it was a big deal. This was right after that. Yes. So someone who had access to USAMRID laboratory. Which laboratory? USAMRID. I forget what the acronym stands for. It's the Bioweapons Laboratory or Biodefense Laboratory. In Maryland. Correct. Yeah. And so Dr. Bruce Ive had worked in that laboratory.

1:16:39he 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 the tinning does it makes them so that they stay aerosolized because if you have bacillus anthracis it's too big of a agent it just it 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 Ivins was a specialist in that, okay? Making these things stay aerosolized and then also developing the countermeasures to it.

1:17:20So 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 Ivins is not the person that did it. From my professional network, I know several people that work directly with him. He's very much a very soft, loving kind of person. I don't see this person all of a sudden taking the spores out of his laboratory and then mailing them to people. This could have been done to continue the biodefense program around bacillus anthracis as one possible scenario.

1:18:07So anyways, I mean, we're sort of off track here, but. So there is no, because no one was ever charged with it. And he, as 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 meaningful suspect ever emerged that you're aware of? Well, I have my opinions of who was likely involved. And I don't want to defame those people. No, and I hope you won't use names. But can you just give it, can you characterize who these people were and what their motive might have been in your view?

1:18:47In 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 actually, in private, afterward, they'll tell you who I think probably is involved. But me being an expert in biodefense, I mean, this is something of one of the first things I did deep dives on. Even, in fact, in my PhD coursework, it was taught by Dr. Mike Osterholm, who he and I do not see eye to eye in a lot of things.

1:19:30He 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. 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.

1:20:04But 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 get it. So it's better that we're working with them. I understand. No, I don't. But that's not crazy. Yeah. I don't think it's. Or certainly I 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.

1:20:46This is Victoria Nuland, 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. 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.

1:21:30She's stupid. That's one of her deepest secrets. She's an idiot. It would have been so much easier just to come out and tell the truth. We have this thing called the Chemical Biological Engagement Program, and we had a relationship with these laboratories in Ukraine. Actually, this is published information by the Department of Defense and the State Department and other agencies involved. And you can go look at CBET 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.

1:21:58And 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 in 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.

1:22:34That is one of the huge problems of being dumb is you don't know what you don't know. And so she probably couldn't articulate anything that would be the truth without putting herself in risk of being perjuring herself. So I think she gave the answer to not perjure herself, not knowing what she didn't know. So stupidity is often the real explanation for a lot of things. Well, the truthful answer could have been, well, Senator so-and-so, I don't know. My office will look into that and we'll give you a written response within a week. And that's how they trained us. Yeah, of course. Well, that's what honest people do is just tell the truth.

1:23:12But I just thought it was interesting that the media cooperated with the cover-up and a million others, of course. But like, why? What is that? Well, that was all part of the psychological operation. Because remember, this didn't happen in a vacuum. They probably didn't want to undermine the public perception of the government related to the COVID origin story. So more of these conspiracy theories that turn out to be true, it undermines the credibility of the main narrative that they're trying to set, which was COVID emerged from the web market. Can I ask an even bigger and dumber question, which is like, why would the U.S.

1:23:47government 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, a 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.

1:24:23No, 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. That's totally right. Yeah, I mean, clearly true. So you start telling the truth. They start tailing you, tased your dog, trying to drive you insane. All 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.

1:25:07Yes, absolutely. And here's just a quick story and maybe I'll cut this in differently. But one of the funny things that they did was that it had been a 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.

1:25:46And 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, a 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 um anyways we're in chicago and um you know the thing is the 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.

1:26:24No 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 and the room goes dead silent. So what do I do? I go over to the fire door, which is right next to this hotel 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 gonna exit they're obviously not gonna go down the fire escape or at the end of the building the only other way they go they're gonna go down the hallway to the next stairway or elevator so i start running down uh the fifth floor ahead of these guys and i hear footsteps and cases and things um the well i heard the case of cleaning i hear the footsteps coming down uh 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 no way but i'm up on the fifth floor and they're coming out on the fourth and I'm looking down at him and they go running down the stairs to the first floor and I'm laughing.

1:27:48So I go over the elevator, I go down the elevator casually, I come in the lobby like there's nothing wrong and the two guys are sitting in chairs and I walk over to him and say, hey guys, did you see two guys come running down the stairs? And they have like wristbands on from drinking at the music festival or bars wherever they were following us around all day. and they said, no, we haven't seen anyone there. 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? Can I get your phone number? I'm gonna have my attorneys call you.

1:28:25We're gonna get a copy of the surveillance footage of these guys. And I'm like, I'm gonna come back and I'm gonna 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. I laughed at most of this.

1:28:58So I call 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 phones, like trying to like get me to come out and like run after him or something. So anyways, 45 minutes go by, the police haven't arrived. And sometimes that's not uncommon probably for a trespassing claim in the UP of Michigan. So I call back and the dispatcher or the 911 operator gives me the phone number of the state police officer that is responding to the call and I'm supposed to call him on the cell phone. Well, I go call the phone number on my cell phone and the phone rings in the bushes.

1:29:41No way. I'm not kidding. And I start laughing and they know because you could hear it like it gets shot off real quick. And I'm just like, I just caught these guys. Like, this is concrete evidence you can obtain from the location of a person's cell phone and the phone calls made. I mean, I know. Were any of these people ever punished? The drone operators, the state cop? No. So these people haven't been 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 to what extent. There was another person. I actually witnessed one of the state police officers in my house through a plate glass window.

1:30:23I was out working on the property. He was on my computer trying to destroy evidence, I think. He lives in the town. 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, excuse me, county and local law enforcement that I was dangerous.

1:30:58That'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. Good. That's the most perfect thing I've ever heard. Okay. It was either that of the Atlantic Council or Georgetown University. I knew it was one of the three. Okay. Okay. Funny. So the other vice presidents, Dr. Epstein or Dr. Oval, I'm not sure where they are. I know Dr. Daszak's trying to get something new going, which is basically, it sounds like sort of the same thing.

1:31:40And, you know, I understand why there have been a series. Has Dr. Daszak 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. Daszak's grilling. And they have the part where they go through where basically he's denying that any of this is gain of function, his involvement, and he's fighting back. And then, 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.

1:32:13And during that questioning, they actually asked Dr. Daszak whether or not he was working with the intelligence community. And at first he lies. He says no, that he wasn't. And then they had actually obtained records that he was, which was apparent. I didn't know that at the time. And they pushed him on it. And then he came clean that he was. So it's not, it's on the official record that he was working with the intelligence. 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 Raw 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 laboratory if we had anyone who was foreign to the lab and i mean anyone external to sandia yeah come to the laboratory we would give them the 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 you know we'd show them whatever we wanted to show the dog and pony show.

1:33:17And the second we left that area would be bug checked before or after they left. So if that's what we do in the United States and that's our standard protocol for top secret, secret environments, we don't think the Chinese are doing the same thing. So you have all these US government officials and Dr. Daszak visiting that laboratory, they, you know, would just take them around and be 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.

1:33:52Well, of course not. Because, 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?

1:34:27So the way that I'm trained and the way that I've worked in this type of intelligence aspect of the science is you look at scenarios. So you come up with every possible scenario and then you use hypothesis testing evidence to eliminate hypothesis or scenarios. So we're now at the stage where this could be a few different things. One, it could have been a pure 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 correct to the world so that that is i think the 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 um one or multiple groups could have intentionally released the agent there 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.

1:35:43And 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 that have been collected over time. As they did with HIV. And then you look through, okay, is it in this location here? What time, when? And then now with modern technology, you can actually use more genetic applications to look at the... So because SARS-CoV-2 evolved so rapidly, you can actually look at the phylogenetic tree to see where in time was the sample.

1:36:23And 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 has never been done at scale. And I don't know why. It's another one of those questions, like why haven't we done this? And there's a number of organizations and the US military that could look at their own genetic blood bank samples to 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 of Defense or the defense medical agencies would do that.

1:37:02So these are questions that could be answered and they haven't been answered. And I have more thoughts and opinions to what has transpired related to the origin of this disease. And I'm now at the position of that if this investigation were to take place, because the world is in such a tenuous position in terms of a potential for World War III, that should happen in a classified setting. And that investigation should be in the form of using the UCMJ process through the Department of Defense because Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Daszak, Ralph Baric, all these people are essentially working on a defense program.

1:37:49They're working with DOD. It falls under UCMJ authority legally. Not many people know that. That'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 Diffuse, are subject to UCMJ. That's where the investigation should happen. It shouldn't happen at the Department of Justice. I believe that Secretary Hegseth has the leadership to execute this properly. And if the investigation warrants, then criminal charges could be brought under UCMJ in a classified setting. So basically a classified trial, which exists, then set a time period of five to 10 years to release the results of that criminal trial publicly.

1:38:33Obviously, 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 components 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. That is a very balanced view, let me just say. Well, thank you. For those who would dismiss you as a wacko, I don't know what I think of that. I haven't thought of it until you said it. But I think that's kind of a window into the way that you think, which is in a restrained and responsible way.

1:39:17Well, 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 in 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 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.

1:39:59I can verify that through, you know, a decade of knowing her well and she's one of the only famous people I've ever met, maybe the only famous person I've ever met who not only didn't get, doesn't own a home because she's never made any money at all because that's the last thing on her mind. So who else can you say that about? Not many people. That's right. And so looking at her leadership right now and her office's leadership and their response to these FOIA requests and their, the nature of these FOIA requests would actually get at some of these root issues and they're objecting to them and they're not releasing the information, she's in the position now where she knows a lot more about what happened or what really happened than she did before President Trump was elected and she was nominated into that position and eventually became the director.

1:40:52So 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 pangulum 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.

1:41:32That it was not a laboratory leak. That it was not a laboratory leak. they still haven't retracted the proximal origins paper, which is a complete fraud. Are you serious? No. And Dr. Ebright from Rutgers University, who I admire and respect, he's fighting this, the good fight every day on social media as an old seasoned professor should. So the whole complex of either the pharmaceutical industry, the scientific community that works tightly with the pharmaceutical industry or are funded by the agencies involved in this are all opposing the natural, or excuse me, the lab, they're all opposing the lab leak.

1:42:17The 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 pangolin lie still?

1:42:54I 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 named 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. Yes. In what way? I forget that he has some kind of either publication record with scientists there or collaboration of research, I believe.

1:43:39Yeah. Well, he's, yeah. It's interesting. You really feel like you don't know your country very well. I mean, I knew people who believed Dr. Peter Hotez. and I thought to myself, how could this, I mean, this is so clearly not true. I don't know how you could believe that. It was really a divisive time in the country or a revealing time and the truth led to division. I guess maybe it's a better way to put it. But anyway, but why in general leaving HOTES out of it? Why would a vax pusher not want to tell the truth about the origin of the virus? Simply that gain-of-function technology is used for virology and vaccine development.

1:44:19And mRNA is a huge portfolio of new vaccine technology development. Thank you. Okay. That's the answer. And 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 on 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?

1:44:59And many of these other studies looked at one type of cancer, for example, lymphoma in Sweden, they didn't find an association, but this Korean study looked at all types of cancers and they're now finding these associations. So the writing's on the wall for mRNA technology. I do not think that it's going to be the future vaccine technology. And 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 anthracis being weaponized, for example, a coronavirus being weaponized.

1:45:39Gain 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.

1:46:14And so what this means if you step back and what this means so man has created life technically synthetic yes and by synth 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 yes that would be the obvious definition of it, right? And there's also synthetic cloning now. So you can have an agent if you know exactly a pathogen or a cell. And some of this isn't advanced. So if it's a more complicated cell type, for example, you might not be able to replicate that.

1:46:56But 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 about... You can text me 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 would be defined as a single cell synthetic organism which does different things that don't exist.

1:47:37and 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 or organism or bacteria to target something like a pest, like a grasshopper, for example. or white people well we're gonna 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 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 living things so you can engineer a synthetic pathogen to attack equipment so you can have it have that synthetic organism uh produce an acid that would eat metal you could have it produce a biofilm which would attack metal underwater like a submarine um this technology is being developed right now at a handful of places some of us in the United States, much of it is.

1:49:04Some 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 side. Now, if you take a look at, and I know I've been watching your show, recent episodes, AI has been a big hot topic and there's tons of investment going into it. we're going to see a fusion between this synthetic biology technology and AI. And it's probably on the four to five year horizon. And the AI will be programmed into the micro circuits 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 nano computer within that cell which does the programming this might sound like crazy science fiction to a lot of people people say that's not possible i don't think anyone would say that's not possible i can 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 gonna be plenty of financial motive um 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 there the trump administration um it 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.

1:50:49A firearm in a good person's hand is a tool to defend and protect yourself, your family against tyranny. An evil person's hand? Yeah, nuclear power, nuclear bombs, I get it. 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 certainly true with everything you're describing, Downside risk far outweighs any potential gain. You live to 110, okay. So I'd argue this. I can completely agree with the upside and downside risk of this. But what I'm saying is there's no stopping it.

1:51:30No, I'm bad. 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, bioweapon development, if you're developing the countermeasure.

1:52:09and they couldn't get anyone to go further past that with having inspections. And I don't see that posture, especially today in today's climate, changing. So you blew 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 I'm wrong too, but I just don't see it right now. Well, I think that there's a path forward. And the path forward to... Wait, 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?

1:52:51Like, 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 field 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. 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.

1:53:31dual-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.

1:54:18So 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 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.

1:55:08You could use it to basically disable the systems on board or the physical structure of the vessel or the satellite. And that's just, I mean, what's really so striking about this is this technology will be able to use to attack objects, but it's a synthetic living thing. There's also the life. So there's a new fork here. You can use it to attack objects or you can use it to attack life itself. And that's more what people would be familiar with. You could use it to attack specific genetic populations, for example. So if a certain population had a genetic trait, you can make the synthetic pathogen specifically target, name your niche of race or population of genetically related, close related families.

1:56:06How 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 worker. 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 or in fact, for whatever reason, COVID had disparate effects on populations. That's absolutely true. I mean, that's scientifically true. And I was quite familiar with that literature when he made that.

1:56:45What does that mean? Which population suffered most from COVID? There was a finding in a scientific publication that two different populations of people of Jewish ancestry, depending which line they're from, one was more heavily impacted than the other. And that was... Sephardic Ashkenazi. Yes. And that was the finding. And I think the point that he was trying to make or maybe didn't articulate well is that the agent can be tailored to have that effect. And that's absolutely true. And that's through old game of function technology. And with synthetic, full synthetics, what I'm saying is you can make this so specific is that if I get your DNA, like off of, you know, say that you threw a cup, I can tailor an agent just to you.

1:57:34And this is how it's changing. And if you're using AI behind that, I could then, and I say that I got a DNA sample from two of your, a couple of your relatives. So I knew what your family tree partially looked like. machine learning is very good at actually random forest and tree decision making you do a lot of complex ai behind this to figure out and make predictions that ai could about what your family tree look like and have the disease travel through your family line and this is 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 And on the flip side of it, you could use it to target specific and rare cancers.

1:58:16And 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 and healthcare applications of it are there. And they're going to be, they will be extremely profitable. Well, imagine that you said like, 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.

1:58:58Like I say, in theory, because things always have side effects, right? Of course. And I just say in general, I would much rather live in a world where I risked dying of tetanus on 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. Oh, I think there's a better solution. Let me give you the upside of 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.

1:59:45You can't find what you're not looking for. And it would be great to see an international team of scientists working on the technology to detect synthetic life when it emerges. Because if we all think it's a threat, we don't have to put our head in the sand an ostrich. If we're all just looking for it and 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.

2:00:30And that's a huge problem in science. I mean, I could talk forever about that. They're not teaching ethics to people like me. They haven't been to the doctor in five years as a result. Yeah. As corrupt as every other institution. Wow. What a heavy conversation that was. Thank you. Where can people, if people are interested in finding out more, people with a stronger stomach and stouter heart than I have, want to know more about the last 10 minutes of our conversation? Do you write about this? Well, I've started to, and I'm not sure how it's been received. I published it on Substack. I've done it, published a little bit on X, and then also on LinkedIn.

2:01:06And it's not very, I don't think people are catching on. Actually, I just solicited proposals to DARPA and a few other places saying, hey, we should be looking at this. And I already know for a fact that they've been thinking 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 A.G. Huff is my Twitter account. But other than that, this is all very much evolving and it's a work in progress. It's amazing when you said gain-of-function research has changed so much in that.

2:01:45I'm thinking, what timeframe 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 the building so if you're in biomedical research in microbiology or virology or bioengineering it's 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 uh teaching this to p8 and it's a trickle down.

2:02:28I always knew science was bad. I just want to brag. I just want to lay my marker down. I just want to say I've always been opposed to science. I've always been opposed to technology. I'm not stupid, but I am convinced of that. I have been my whole life. So I think I'm being vindicated in real time. Well, maybe I can cheer you up a bit. It's not all evil. And to your point earlier, it's the people behind it. Well, that's it. And maybe we need to do a better, my community, the scientific community, We need 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.

2:03:08And 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 preying on them? Well, yeah, not just sexually. Not sexually, but in terms of the PhD world, it's very common that research professors basically steal their students' work and have them take credit for their work. And the students aren't taught about ethics in science and research on top of it.

2:03:46I mean, it's not like it's required coursework. Most scientists don't train their students in ethics. So how do we become better as a community of creating better people as scientists so they're not just out chasing money? And it's mentorship and we have to break the cycle. I mean, we have to break the cycle. It's going to take a radical religious revival to do that. Nothing short of that is going to work. That's my view. That's what I'm hoping for because I feel like we are on the cusp of like true darkness. I agree. And I think about these things a lot. And scientists, we have people ask me what I do.

2:04:27I'm sitting there staring out the window and I'm like, I'm working. And they're like, you know what? 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 come up with answers and we try not to waste any of our brain power on things that don't matter. And. I don't know if it's with a full religious, if it's a fully religious aspect, at least within the scientific community. I'm being real here that I know many of these scientists are atheists. And I know that many of these scientists who are atheists are, some of them I should say are great and fantastic people.

2:05:06at least at a minimum for them 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

2:06:05We've got a new website we hope you will visit. It's called newcommissionnow.com, and it refers to a new 9-11 commission. So we spent months putting together our 9-11 documentary series, and if there's one thing we learned, it's that, in fact, there was foreknowledge of the attacks. People knew. The American public deserves to know. We're shocked, actually, to learn that, to have that confirmed, but it's true. The evidence is overwhelming. The CIA, for example, knew the hijackers were here in the United States. They knew they were planning an act of terror. In his passport is a visa to go to the United States of America.

2:06:43A foreign national was caught celebrating as the World Trade Center fell and later said he was in New York, quote, to document the event. I didn't 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.

2:07:18government 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? Why 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.

2:07:54We 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 newcommissionnow.com to add your name to our petition. We're not getting paid for this. We're doing this because we really mean it. Newcommissionnow.com.