USAID PREDICT - Part Six - CNN Ignored Wuhan Lab Smoking Gun In 2020, Tens Of Thousands Died In Lockdowns As A Result
CNN Was Informed In March 2020 That USA PREDICT Did Gain Of Function With Wuhan Lab For A Decade Before Pandemic Breakout, And CNN Buried The Story.
https://usrtk.org/covid-19-origins/celebrated-virus-hunter-siphoned-taxpayer-funds-for-his-private-global-virome-project/
In late March 2020, an investigative group called the Potomac Group informed CNN, in a taped interview, that malfeasance existed with a US State Department Program called USAID PREDICT. I was the spokesperson for the Potomac Group, and I pointed out the USAID PREDICT malfeasance to CNN Reporter Donie O’Sullivan, which he covered up in his CNN report. A recording of the exchange between George Webb of the Potomac Group and CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan of the recording can be listened to here.
https://share.descript.com/view/s9oaH3mxdXA
Detailed Summary
This U.S. Right to Know article by Emily Kopp (March 16, 2022) exposes how Dennis Carroll, then director of USAID’s Emerging Pandemic Threats Division, concurrently spearheaded the publicly funded PREDICT program and privately co-founded the Global Virome Project (GVP). Over a decade, USAID disbursed at least $210 million to PREDICT, which served as a “proof of concept” for GVP’s ambitious $1.2 billion bid to catalogue wildlife viruses—work Carroll advanced while receiving six-figure federal salaries without an ethics waiver. Key watchdogs (Walter Shaub, Kedric Payne, Scott Amey, Virginia Canter) warn that Carroll’s overlapping roles violated conflict-of-interest rules, and leading virologists (Michael Osterholm, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut, Kristian G. Andersen) question whether GVP’s predictive promise justifies its vast cost and inherent biosafety risks. usrtk.org
People
Dennis Carroll
Dennis Carroll served as director of USAID’s Emerging Pandemic Threats Division and later became chair of the Global Virome Project (GVP). While overseeing USAID’s $210 million PREDICT program from 2010 onward, Carroll began quietly building GVP in March 2017—drafting board lists, soliciting donations, and refining tax-exempt applications—using his official USAID email. Ethics experts argue that Carroll’s dual roles breached federal conflict-of-interest laws by leveraging government prestige to benefit a private entity. usrtk.org
Carroll pitched GVP as “the beginning of the end of the pandemic era,” seeking $1.2 billion to catalog over one million wildlife viruses to forecast zoonotic spillover. Despite his lofty claims, internal emails show USAID funneled at least $270,969 toward GVP-related activities before its formal nonprofit incorporation. Critics warn that such dual-use virology work may itself pose pandemic risks if mismanaged in the field. usrtk.org
Under Carroll’s oversight, USAID partially funded GVP board members’ travel to Beijing and Bangkok to promote affiliated national virome projects. He continued to draw the maximum allowable federal salary ($166,500 in 2019) while managing GVP’s founding operations—a reality Walter Shaub called “troubling” given the absence of an ethics waiver. Carroll did not respond to requests for comment or to provide GVP’s tax records. usrtk.org
Peter Daszak
Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, co-founded GVP as its secretary and treasurer while EcoHealth Alliance remained a primary USAID PREDICT contractor. Congressional investigators have scrutinized Daszak’s collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology on “gain-of-function” work, raising conflicts over his dual roles. Email excerpts reveal Daszak consulting lawyers to navigate sensitivities around his USAID-funded activities and GVP promotion. usrtk.org
Daszak continues to defend GVP’s cost by comparing its $1.2 billion price tag to the ~$570 billion annual economic loss from pandemics. He pitched GVP as essential infrastructure for pre-emptive outbreak detection, emphasizing that mapping viral diversity could yield early warning systems. Yet critics argue that sequence-based forecasting overlooks the complex ecological factors driving spillover events. usrtk.org
In March 2019 Daszak emailed Carroll to flag overlap issues—seeking safer language as long as EcoHealth kept receiving USAID support tied to GVP activities. This redacted exchange illustrates the murky boundary between government grants and private-sector advocacy in high-stakes biodefense research. It underscores calls for clearer ethical firewalls when public funds underwrite dual-use scientific enterprises. usrtk.org
Shi Zhengli
Shi Zhengli, the renowned “Bat Woman” coronavirus researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), was slated to join GVP fieldwork under Carroll’s plan. Her involvement lent GVP scientific credibility given her expertise in bat-borne coronavirus surveillance. However, Shi’s dual engagement in PREDICT-funded projects and prospective GVP activities exemplifies the entwined public–private research networks that the article critiques. usrtk.org
Shi’s prior work under EcoHealth Alliance and PREDICT directly informed WIV collaborations, fueling concerns about gain-of-function safety and transparency. As WIV faced intense scrutiny over SARS-CoV-2 origins, her participation in GVP blurred lines between voluntary surveillance and covert pathogen enhancement. Critics argue that high-throughput virus cataloguing without stringent biosafety protocols increases leak risks. usrtk.org
Despite her scientific standing, Shi has publicly disavowed any misconduct, emphasizing PREDICT’s non-pathogenic surveillance remit. Yet, the GVP emails show her name on early board drafts—raising questions about institutional oversight and the separation of government and private research agendas. This dynamic spotlights the need for robust international governance of transnational virus-hunting efforts. usrtk.org
Walter Shaub
Walter Shaub, former director of the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), publicly criticized Carroll’s use of his USAID email to conduct GVP business. Shaub emphasized that if GVP was not a government project, Carroll’s actions “raise troubling” conflict-of-interest concerns. His remarks underscore OGE’s mandate to enforce clear boundaries between official duties and private gains. usrtk.org
During his tenure, Shaub championed strong recusal and waiver processes to prevent ethical lapses by federal employees. He warned that failure to seek advisory opinions or waivers could erode public trust in government stewardship of taxpayer funds. Shaub’s perspective highlights the legal codes that Carroll may have skirted by not obtaining requisite clearances. usrtk.org
Post-OGE, Shaub has remained a vocal advocate for transparency, criticizing “revolving door” practices where officials leverage government roles for private advantage. His commentary lends weight to calls for retroactive ethics reviews of PREDICT and GVP activities. Shaub’s involvement illustrates how watchdog interventions can shape public discourse on government–industry entanglements. usrtk.org
Michael Osterholm
Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota, challenged GVP’s predictive claims. He noted that detailed knowledge of viruses like Zika and Nipah had not yet yielded effective vaccines, questioning the practical payoff of cataloguing vast viral libraries. Osterholm asked pointedly, “Which one did they prevent?” underscoring skepticism about GVP’s real-world impact. usrtk.org
A former State Department health-security advisor, Osterholm has long advocated for actionable surveillance over speculative prediction. He argued that GVP’s ambitious scope risks diverting resources from proven prevention and response strategies. His critique highlights the importance of outcome-driven metrics in funding high-cost scientific initiatives. usrtk.org
Osterholm’s track record in advising on pandemic preparedness lends authority to his cautionary stance. He warns that static viral databases can quickly become obsolete as pathogens evolve, limiting long-term utility. Osterholm urges that future programs balance innovation with demonstrable public-health benefits. usrtk.org
Edward C. Holmes
Edward C. Holmes, evolutionary biologist at the University of Sydney, co-authored a Nature commentary in 2018 arguing that GVP’s foundational premise was “misguided.” Holmes and co-signers noted that only a small subset of the ~250 known human viruses cause major epidemics, challenging the notion that sequence data alone can forecast spillovers. Their analysis underscored the low signal-to-noise ratio in wildlife virome surveys. usrtk.org
Holmes further critiqued the disproportionate cost of GVP—roughly one-quarter of NIAID’s annual budget—relative to uncertain outcomes. He warned that overinvestment in cataloguing could detract from developing countermeasures and strengthening health systems. Holmes’s perspective emphasizes cost-effectiveness in global-health funding decisions. usrtk.org
In subsequent editorials, Holmes reiterated the importance of regulating live-animal markets over mass viral surveillance. He argued that preventing high-risk contacts between humans and wildlife offers better pandemic mitigation than exhaustive virus collection. Holmes’s thought leadership calls for strategic resource allocation in biodefense research. usrtk.org
Andrew Rambaut
Andrew Rambaut, virologist at the University of Edinburgh, joined Holmes in warning that GVP’s model would struggle to anticipate zoonotic emergence. He highlighted that viral ecology and human behavior—not genomics alone—drive epidemic risk. Rambaut cautioned that predictive algorithms based on sequence data risk overlooking critical transmission variables. usrtk.org
His research on viral phylogenetics demonstrates how rapidly coronaviruses can recombine and adapt, complicating static forecasts. Rambaut urged investment in real-time outbreak detection and rapid-response platforms rather than large-scale wildlife sampling. His emphasis on adaptable surveillance frameworks informs current pandemic-preparedness policy. usrtk.org
Rambaut’s critiques have influenced funding agencies to require stronger justification for pathogen-collection initiatives. He promotes transparency and data sharing to maximize collective scientific benefit. Rambaut’s advocacy underscores the need for interdisciplinary approaches in pandemic forecasting. usrtk.org
Kristian G. Andersen
Kristian G. Andersen of Scripps Research co-authored the 2018 Nature piece cautioning against GVP’s overly optimistic assumptions. He pointed out that viral spillover events remain rare and poorly correlated with genomic novelty. Andersen argued for a shift toward mechanistic studies of host–pathogen interactions over broad bioprospecting. usrtk.org
Andersen’s work on coronavirus evolution during the early COVID-19 outbreak demonstrated how laboratory data can inform real-time risk assessment. He advocates coupling field surveillance with laboratory characterization to assess viral threat potential. His holistic view balances discovery with targeted, hypothesis-driven research. usrtk.org
As a senior scientist, Andersen emphasizes open collaboration across institutions and disciplines to improve global-health outcomes. He has called for robust biosafety protocols to accompany any expansion of virus-collection efforts. Andersen’s insights help refine the future design of predictive biodefense programs. usrtk.org
Organizations
Global Virome Project (GVP)
The Global Virome Project is a private consortium seeking $1.2 billion to survey over one million wildlife viruses, aiming to pre-empt zoonotic pandemics through genomic catalogs. Founded in 2018 with public champions like Dennis Carroll and Peter Daszak, GVP used USAID’s PREDICT program as its “proof of concept” despite not yet holding official nonprofit status. Critics warn that GVP’s high-throughput fieldwork risks biosafety lapses and may offer limited predictive value relative to its cost. usrtk.org
GVP board members such as Edward Rubin acknowledged USAID’s strong advocacy for the project, with taxpayer funds underwriting travel and pitch events in Bangkok and Beijing. Internal spreadsheets reveal at least $270,969 in direct support from PREDICT-related budgets before GVP’s incorporation. This financial entanglement raises conflict-of-interest and oversight concerns among ethics watchdogs. usrtk.org
Supporters compare GVP’s price tag to the estimated $570 billion annual economic loss from pandemics, arguing that early warning systems justify the investment. Nonetheless, leading virologists and ethicists question whether the database approach fulfills its promise or diverts resources from proven interventions. GVP’s future depends on resolving these scientific and ethical debates. usrtk.org
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
USAID funded the ten-year, $210 million PREDICT program, which aimed to detect emerging pathogens globally and served as the basis for GVP’s launch. Emails obtained via FOIA show USAID’s Emerging Pandemic Threats Division not only designed PREDICT but also partially bankrolled GVP outreach before its formal nonprofit recognition. Ethics officials question whether this blurred government–private boundaries violated conflict-of-interest laws requiring waivers. usrtk.org
Despite assurances that Carroll sought no outside-work waivers, USAID records show no clearance for his simultaneous GVP activities. The agency maintains it provided no further funding once GVP was incorporated, but watchdogs argue that early support already tainted the project’s integrity. USAID’s dual roles—as grantor and covert promoter—exemplify the challenges of ensuring transparent public-health funding. usrtk.org
Looking forward, USAID must clarify guidelines on staff involvement with external nonprofits and strengthen ethics oversight. Its experience with PREDICT and GVP offers a cautionary tale for future “dual-use” research programs. Comprehensive policy reforms are needed to prevent similar conflicts in global-health initiatives. usrtk.org
EcoHealth Alliance
EcoHealth Alliance, led by Peter Daszak, received PREDICT grants to study coronavirus ecology and has collaborated extensively with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. As a GVP co-founder, EcoHealth facilitated board recruitment, fundraising pitches, and media outreach—activities funded in part by the same USAID that contracted EcoHealth’s research arm. This circular funding arrangement drew scrutiny for enabling potential gain-of-function work under diplomatic cover. usrtk.org
EcoHealth’s dual missions—global disease surveillance and translational research—blur academic inquiry with biodefense imperatives. Congressional probes into EcoHealth’s WIV grants highlighted insufficient biosafety transparency and governance. The organization’s leadership role in GVP underscores the need for clear separation between public-sector grants and private consortium agendas. usrtk.org
Despite controversies, EcoHealth continues to receive NIH and USAID funding for spillover surveillance, advocating for integrated “One Health” approaches. Critics assert that its conflation of wildlife sampling and laboratory experimentation risks unintended pathogen release. EcoHealth’s trajectory illustrates the fine line between necessary pandemic preparedness and dangerous dual-use research. usrtk.org
PREDICT (USAID Program)
PREDICT was inaugurated in 2009 as a $210 million USAID initiative to identify novel pathogens with pandemic potential through global wildlife sampling. The program partnered with over 30 countries, academic institutions, and NGOs to build field-based surveillance networks—work later repurposed as GVP’s foundation. Internal emails show PREDICT budgets directly underwriting GVP’s early operations, raising questions about the proper scope of government grants. usrtk.org
Serving as PREDICT’s “proof of concept,” GVP leveraged existing surveillance infrastructures and laboratory pipelines to advocate for broader viral cataloguing. Critics argue that PREDICT’s achievements—while scientifically valuable—did not translate into clear pandemic prevention outcomes. The program’s legacy now informs debates on how best to balance surveillance coverage with actionable public-health interventions. usrtk.org
As PREDICT enters its second decade, stakeholders call for rigorous impact assessments and standardized ethical frameworks to govern dual-use research. Transparent reporting and independent audits are needed to ensure future programs do not repeat PREDICT’s governance ambiguities. Lessons from PREDICT’s evolution will shape the next generation of global-health security initiatives. usrtk.org
Office of Government Ethics (OGE)
The Office of Government Ethics, led by Walter Shaub until 2017, enforces federal conflict-of-interest statutes that bar employees from using official resources for private benefit. Shaub’s public admonishment of Carroll’s GVP involvement underscores OGE’s role in safeguarding ethical conduct across executive-branch agencies. His critique illustrates how OGE guidance—or lack thereof—can significantly influence high-profile research programs. usrtk.org
OGE regulations require federal officials to recuse themselves or seek formal waivers before engaging with prospective employers or side ventures. Carroll’s apparent failure to obtain such clearances highlights enforcement gaps and the need for stronger oversight mechanisms. OGE’s oversight capacity remains crucial for preventing similar overlap in future government–industry collaborations. usrtk.org
Post-OGE, Shaub continues to advocate for tighter ethics rules in intelligence and global-health research. His interventions have amplified calls for transparency in how scientific grants are administered within government. OGE’s vigilance sets precedents that temper the ambitions of powerful dual-use research consortia. usrtk.org
Project on Government Oversight (POGO)
The Project on Government Oversight, represented by General Counsel Scott Amey, condemned Carroll’s dual role as a “fundamental conflict of interest.” POGO monitors federal spending and whistleblower protections, drawing attention to blurred lines between public-sector authority and private-sector profit. Amey’s call for legal investigations underscores POGO’s mission to enforce accountability in government programs. usrtk.org
POGO’s research on defense contracting and intelligence funding has long exposed waste and ethical lapses in high-security domains. Its advocacy for congressional oversight bolsters demands for retrospective reviews of PREDICT and GVP finances. POGO’s involvement illustrates how watchdog groups can elevate technical ethics concerns into legislative inquiries. usrtk.org
Moving forward, POGO urges DOI audits and Inspector General assessments to determine whether U.S. civil-service rules were breached. Its recommendations include mandatory ethics training for scientific program managers. POGO’s watchdog role remains vital to preventing future misuse of taxpayer dollars in dual-use research. usrtk.org
Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP)
CIDRAP, housed at the University of Minnesota and directed by Michael Osterholm, bridges academic research with real-world public-health policy. Its experts have critically evaluated GVP’s approach, emphasizing practical disease-prevention over speculative bioprospecting. CIDRAP’s guidance has influenced policymakers to prioritize adaptable surveillance and response frameworks. usrtk.org
Osterholm’s tenure at CIDRAP has focused on lessons from past outbreaks, advocating for robust health-system readiness and rapid diagnostics. CIDRAP collaborates with global stakeholders to translate scientific insights into operational strategies. Its role in pandemic preparedness underscores the value of outcome-oriented research institutions. usrtk.org
As GVP evolves, CIDRAP continues to convene expert panels examining dual-use research ethics and biosafety best practices. Its publications serve as authoritative references for balancing innovation with risk mitigation. CIDRAP’s contributions help shape evidence-based global-health security policies. usrtk.org
EcoHealth Alliance
EcoHealth Alliance, led by Peter Daszak, implements high-throughput viral surveillance in hotspots, including its controversial work at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Funded through USAID’s PREDICT and NIH grants, EcoHealth’s collaborations have drawn intense Congressional and public scrutiny. The organization’s co-leadership of GVP exemplifies the intersection of academic inquiry and biodefense imperatives. usrtk.org
EcoHealth promotes integrative “One Health” approaches, linking human, animal, and environmental health to forecast spillovers. Critics argue that insufficient transparency and oversight have allowed risky gain-of-function research to proceed unchecked. EcoHealth’s model highlights the challenges of ensuring scientific rigor while safeguarding biosafety. usrtk.org
Going forward, EcoHealth must navigate evolving regulations on pathogen research and public trust concerns. Congressional hearings on its WIV grants underscore the need for clear accountability. The organization’s future partnerships will likely hinge on proven safety records and transparent governance. usrtk.org
PREDICT (USAID Program)
PREDICT was launched by USAID in 2009 as a flagship global-health security initiative, investing $210 million over ten years to detect novel zoonotic pathogens. It established field networks across 30 countries, funding local and academic labs to sample wildlife and sequence viral genomes. PREDICT’s infrastructure later underpinned GVP’s efforts, illustrating a seamless transition from public grant to private consortium. usrtk.org
Evaluations of PREDICT show scientific advancements in pathogen discovery but limited evidence of pandemic prevention. As GVP promises expanded scope, critics caution against replicating PREDICT’s governance shortcomings in ethics and oversight. Lessons from PREDICT’s legacy inform recommendations for accountable, outcome-driven surveillance programs. usrtk.org
With PREDICT’s sunset, USAID faces decisions on sustaining global-health security networks amid evolving biothreat landscapes. Transparency in grant allocations and independent audits are essential to restoring stakeholder confidence. Future programs must integrate clear impact metrics to justify continued investment. usrtk.org
https://share.descript.com/view/s9oaH3mxdXA
USAID PREDICT had conducted a ten-year, covert operation with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to research bioagents that would indelibly mark the human genome of the person infected by the virus for the purpose of tracking and tracing them for social credit scoring and biosurveillance schemes. A front organization called the Global Virome Project was created as a front to launch a “live exercise” in the United States after a preparatory “live exercise” in Wuhan, China in September and October of 2019.
Source - US Right To Know
Founder of USAID, Dennis Carroll, created the humanitarian-sounding “Global Virome Project” for the expressed purpose of launching a CoronaVirus ‘Live Exercise” in China and then in the United States.
Source - US Right To Know
Carroll organized all the Global Virome Project Board and promotion under the auspices of USAID PREDICT, a government program agency inside the US State Department.
Source - US Right To Know
“Bat Woman” Shi Zhengli and EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak were intricately involved in the Global Virome Project Scheme. Daszak even backs away from knowing wrongdoing in an email to Dennis Carroll by hedging his language in the GVP’s foundational documents. Three years later, these documents still remain redacted.
Source - US Right To Know
USAID PREDICT was also intimately connected to Dr. Robert Malone’s University of California Davis and the monkey lab there and to Nathan Wolfe and Hunter Biden’s Metabiota Labs.
The One Health Institute is a front organization for the WHO to undermine the authority of the US Constitution by “overruling” the governance of the US Constitution with pressing health pandemic declared by the World Health Organization.
A smoking gun spreadsheet has surfaced from a person who worked with Dennis Carroll on foreign travel for the front Global Virome Project, using USAID money only. Over a quarter of a million dollars was spent by USAID PREDICT for the Global Virome Project alone to align the conspirators’ stories in foreign ports of call.
An internal USAID PREDICT spreadsheet clearly shows the USAID money bankrolling the front Global Virome Project in the year before the pandemic live exercise for CoronaVirus.
I pointed out a similar US State Department USAID cutout called Chemonics that practiced the use of chemical weapons in Haiti before using them in the overthrow of Qaddafi in Libya in 2012 and the attempted overthrow of Assad in Syria in 2013 and 2014.
Citizen Journalist George Webb reported in 2017 and 2018 about a US State Department cutout named Chemonics which practiced chemical weapon use in Haiti in 2010-2011 in preparation for their use in the overthrow of Qaddafi in Libya in 2012 and the attempted overthrow of Assad in Syria in 2013-2014.
In my March 2020 interview with CNN’s Donie O’Sullivan, I clearly laid out the blame at the feet of the US State Department’s presence of Armed Diplomatic Security Services Officers (the Benassis below) in Wuhan before the pandemic outbreak. I also specifically point out that USAID PREDICT was the offending program backed up by purchase orders to the University of North Carolina and EcoHealth Alliance with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
George Webb (from March 2020 CNN Interview Transcript)
I feel like I reported the situation responsibly. I think the American people have a right to know how this started. I think the American people, the American State Department, and the President need to produce this information for the Chinese, they're saying, we did it. We're saying they did it.
Everyone's lost their job, their homes, their businesses that they've built up over their whole lives. Over this, the Benassis are not the only victims. This is not the time to paint one person. Who is in in the middle and mix of all this, who's stonewalling on producing the information? It's not the time to make one person the victim when there's the whole world is being victimized here.
CNN Reporter Donie O’Sullivan:
Who do you think is, who do you think is responsible for the virus?
George Webb, Potomac Group:
Fort Dietrick and I'm going by people who work there who said they did all this transfection. I'm not saying it didn't occur naturally by walking up the genomic ladder from bats to humans.
CNN Reporter Donie O’Sullivan:
So you think it came from the US, not China?
George Webb, Potomac Group:
Oh, no. There's a collaboration. Dr. Fauci wrote five, $750,000 checks from the University of North Carolina. It was called the USA Predict Program. It was called Okay. The Thousand Talents program. Dr. Bavari has four startups with Wuhan. He worked at Fort Detrick. Come on. It was called the USA PREDICT Program.
It was called the Thousand Talents Program. Dr. Bavari has four startups with Wuhan. He worked at Fort Dietrich. Come on. This is a joint development. It's a joint development. Between the United States and China. It, there's the purchase orders. I don't know how else you can see it.
You can read the report that came out of this 37 pages of exactly what they did. This is a joint development. It's a joint development between the United States and China. It, there's the purchase orders. I don't know how else you can see it. You can read the report that came out of this 37 pages of exactly what they did.
Donie O’Sullivan cuts me off in the interview when I mention Virginia Benassi getting all the CoronaVirus bids and doing the training at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Citizen Journalist George Webb alerted Donie O’Sullivan of CNN that the same person who did the lab leak training in Wuhan was the direct beneficiary of receiving the CoronaVirus Wellcome Trust and WHO vaccine bids before the Pandemic Live Exercise.
Other news outlets like Whitney Webb’s Unlimited Hangout reported that the University of Texas Galveston did the training in Wuhan in March of 2020. The correct name is actually the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, but all the same, this Virginia Benassi lead from March 2020 remains the hottest smoking gun of the Origins of the CoronaVirus investigation.
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/07/investigative-reports/darpas-man-in-wuhan/
The most important finding of the Potomac Group remains finding the connective tissue between Virginia Benassi doing the lab leak training at the Wuhan Institute of Virology before the lab leak, and then getting all the CoronaVirus vaccine bids for the Wellcome Trust in May 2019 and for the WHO in October 2019. Virginia Benassi’s coauthorship of the WHO R&D Blueprint the Director of the Fort Detrick Lab that was shut down in July of 2019, Sina Bavari, also remains as a red hot smoking gun to the conspiracy. In previous posts on Substack, I outlined CIA operative and DARPA scientist Michael Callahan’s ten years in Wuhan with USAID PREDICT under the academic cover as an MIT professor.
DARPA's Doctor Death In Wuhan For Years Before Outbreak - Part One
DARPA Doctor Michael Callahan has had a Harvard professorship diplomatic cover in Wuhan since 2009. By March 2020, I had been writing about DARPA’s Virus Vaccine game for four years. The idea was simple. DARPA was given the job of taking all the old bioagents of the old Soviet Union, and in a series of controlled releases around the world, creating the…
I have outlined Dr. Robert Malone’s CIA partner, Darrell Galloway, laundering the technology from the old Soviet Union to supply USAID with the key technology as well. I have also Dr. Robert Malone’s FBI DNA Database partner, Darrell Ricke, at the Leidos Lincoln Lab at MIT, specializing in DNA identification with a program called IdPRISM.
Look for the title below in my Substack. I am at the end of my email limit so I can’t paste it here.
(Corona Will Usher In CBDCs With WHO's One Health Initiative)
Corona Will Usher In CBDCs With WHO's One Health Initiative
Recently, on the Courtenay Turner show, I repeated my contention that all the terror and confusion brought about by CoronaVirus ushered in Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) and the acceptance of biometric phones in much the same way the 9/11 Anthrax attacks ushered in the Patriot Act and mass surveillance by the NSA.
Keeping up with your reports exhausts me. I can't fathom how you persevere. There are endlessly re-invented shell games, names and acronyms to track, and yet you do it all. We need the best and brightest among us to amplify your findings and stretch your reach beyond what any medium "allows". Phenomenal investigative work and analysis.
OK that was great, you're awesome at what you do Mr Webb. I do understand what you're doing now. They use the DNA for unique identifier, via a "viral" Q-dot and transmit by kinked Nano wire antennae .
Slowly, slowly catch a vaccine cowboy.