Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.
>> The Joe Rogan Experience.
>> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY
NIGHT. All day.
>> Come here. Scary. [gasps]
>> Biological war. Oh boy. Every time I
talk to you, I'm [ __ ] terrified.
[laughter]
>> That is my part-time job to to actually
scare Joe Rogan. If I can do that. Wow.
>> Yeah. Every time I talk to you, I'm
like, "Oh no." Last time it was nuclear
war. Oh no. Now it's biological war. Oh
no.
>> Which is actually maybe even grimmer
than nuclear cuz at least in nuclear
you're just like gone in the flash.
>> Um I did a show a while back on the
Sci-Fi Network called Joe Rogan
Questions Everything. And one of the
episodes we did was about biological
war. And so we spoke to this guy who
used to work for uh Russia uh during the
Cold War and he was talking about how
much anthrax they had and how much work
they had done on biological weapons and
it was terrifying. He said they had like
just giant vats of anthrax like enough
to kill everyone in New York City.
>> They were mil was it Ken Alabbec? Do you
know? [sighs]
>> He was Russian.
>> Russian. Yeah. There was a couple of
those Russian defector scientists who
came here and told us everything they
were doing. There was like, you know,
tons of anthrax and plague that plague.
That's actually the pathogen that I use
in the scenario I write is plague
because it's
>> so crazy scary, so dangerous,
>> sits at the top of the government's tier
one select agent of dangerous pathogens.
So, one of the things that we did during
this episode, we went to Galveastston to
I guess it's a CDC lab that they had
there. So, they have these super thick
walls and everyone's wearing space suits
and they have these tubes attached to
them and they were studying all these
different really horrible fatal
diseases. And I'm like, well, what if
this stuff gets out? Like, it's right
here. Like, what what happens if it gets
out? Like, will we take every precaution
this and that? But his concern, he said,
was not for genetically engineered
viruses. His fear was really just from
natural virus. He says that is just as
scary as anything that's out there.
>> This is the Russian scientist who
>> No, this is a different guy. This is an
American scientist.
>> Yeah, I think they like to say that, you
know, mother nature is just as powerful.
But in truth, that's actually not true
because think about what you can do with
genetic modification. Make it more
virilent, more transmissible.
>> Yes. and make it defeat existing
vaccines and antibiotics.
>> Well, we are right now in the middle of
the Fouchy hearings. So, yes, we are.
>> He is now testifying in front of
Congress and pleading the fifth about
everything, including the color of his
tie. It's very weird to watch.
>> It's uh in in one way, it's like I told
you to a lot of my liberal friends that
wanted to pretend that he was a great
guy and that he wasn't doing anything
wrong. And now that all these emails
have gotten out where it shows that he
knew that the fatality rate was much
lower than they were saying. He knew
that it [snorts] wasn't dangerous for
children, that they didn't need
vaccines. He knew that the social
distancing thing was all nonsense.
And he's got a blanket pardon for 10
years. And the thing is, it's like these
people get money for research. And
that's what they do. They do research.
So if you get money and you get grants
for research, well, you're going to go
do research. And if your research is
gain of function research that makes
viruses more infectious to human beings
and you know you have to do it because
that's your job. That's what you do.
That's what you studied. That's what you
went to school for. Like what a crazy
[ __ ] thing we're doing.
>> It is bananas. And it's also I mean it
was really unfortunate. I thought that
yesterday he took the fifth cuz I for
one just want to hear
call me Pauliana the truth be told you
know. Well, he's not going to tell you
the truth no matter what. He's going to
obiscate and dance around it and use
words that don't totally apply to what
he's saying and just ramble on. And
>> I mean, CO absolutely could have been
this incredible lesson for all of us. I
mean, the nightmare that it was
>> and instead were just left. I mean, can
you believe that we still with all the
power of national security that we still
allegedly do not know where the virus
came from?
>> Don't we
>> definitively? I mean, definitively,
people certainly have their ideas,
>> but I think it's high probability that
it came from the Wuhan lab. I I I think
most experts are now saying that. And I
think the only reason why they weren't
saying that was because of Fouchy and it
was really because that he had funded
this through the Eco Health Alliance.
>> Look, I say that in a very like 90,000
foot neutral way. In other words,
>> every sub I leave co that part of it out
of my book. It becomes like a like a
metaphor that underpins the narrative
and people end up reading the book and
going, "Wow, I actually think
differently about COVID." which was kind
of my intention, but every subject
matter expert I spoke to encouraged me
to put in the book that almost certainly
it was a lab leak. Like it's just but
but so when I say we still don't know
that's in a bit of error quotes meaning
how is it that someone can't how does it
all rest on Fouchy who had reasons to
mislead us? We know that from looking at
what what's been released. How can it be
that he's the only one with the alleged
answer to it all?
>> Well, I mean, the other scientists that
were investigating it from the
beginning, you know, when they examined
the virus, they were saying that all
indications that it had been manipulated
and they were pretty public about that
and then they weren't and then they
changed their tune. It's just when you
have power and you have influence like
he did and the power to make or break
careers in the medical world where these
people are terrified. You know, they're
already dealing with uh malpractice
insurance which is very high. They
already have very high student debt,
student loan debt, and it's it's a bad
situation for them. and they're not
going to stick their neck out to, you
know, risk their everything that they've
worked for for 20, 30, whatever years
for this thing. And that's what most
people did. Most people just stuck their
head in the sand and, you know,
>> I sort of went along with a party line,
which is also
>> really crazy when you drill down on how
dangerous biological weapons are. I mean
look, most of the people I talked to
said gain of function is a euphemism for
biological weapons engineering.
>> Right. Right.
>> Period. Full stop.
>> And a lot of it is fun funded by the
>> And that Yes. And and and what's crazy
is that these are people that have
worked for Obama just as much as you
know all sides of the aisle working the
real people who are not as you say they
don't have something to gain
financially.
>> Well we should say that Obama actually
stopped gain of function research when
he was in office which was a very wise
thing for him very wise by by you know
his decision. So what do you make of the
fact that like Obama stopped this
>> dangerous research also called dual use
research of concern he stops it
>> and then suddenly it becomes a partisan
issue that republic only one side of the
aisle decides that I mean that's what
confuses me because if the real if you
look at the facts the very knowledgeable
people that are wellinformed by people
who don't have financial gain know that
gain of function is essentially weapons
engineering.
>> Yes. And the thing is they're doing gain
of function to make these viruses more
trans transmissible supposedly so that
they can come up with cures but they
didn't have any cures. And but I think
it's like okay that also sounds great
for them to say we're trying to work on
cures but they're leaving out a really
important point is that in order for us
to find a cure we have to make the
pathogen more virilent more
transmissible. We have to make something
for example airborne that wasn't
airborne
>> right
>> we have to demonstrate that it could
cause a pandemic. You see that a lot in
the literature in order to figure out
how to cure it. Well, that's a catch 22.
That's incredibly dangerous.
Like, we have to actually make a weapon
to be able to defeat a weapon.
That's actually what is being said,
>> right? But it it seems like there's a
lot of [ __ ] going on and that really
what they're trying to do is make better
diseases that work better and they can
use them. Like this is part of the
argument about whether or not Lyme
disease was engineered.
>> And there's a lot of evidence that
points to the fact that it was. And one
of the reasons for it is this Plum
Island laboratory that's right off the
coast of Lime, Connecticut, where the
disease was really first named in the
1970s or whatever it was.
>> Yeah.
>> And so they were doing gain of function
research. They were doing biological
research on ticks in order to infect
ticks with diseases and then they would
drop them out of airplanes and overwhelm
the medical establishment in these
areas. And the idea was that if you're
fighting the enemy, you can fly over,
dump a bunch of ticks on them, they all
get these horrible diseases, everyone's
sick, you don't have an effective
fighting force.
>> I mean, it's like we need to create a
counter measure, but first we need to
create the weapon.
>> I don't even know if they think that far
ahead. I think a lot of it, I'm just
guessing, but I think a lot of it is
just what what I was saying earlier.
There's people and their job is to to do
this kind of research and they want
grants and they want funding and they
want and then there's other people that
can profit off of this of this these
grants and this funding and creating
labs and doing all this stuff and they
just start doing it and they come up
with reasons why it should be done. And
then of course you have military people
that want the military applications of
these diseases and so they they help
facilitate it and they don't even think
what what is this how does this play
out? They think about their own
interests their their own short-term
benefits of having these things and they
just continue the research. They
continue to work and the fact that they
even push back on the idea that it was a
lab leak so hard when you have a lab
right where it was leaked. I mean, right
where it started happening, you've got a
lab there. And then the famous John
Stewart bit that he did on the Co Bear
show, which is hilarious.
>> Yep.
>> I mean, that's it's crazy. It's the
Wuhan Institute for
>> Corona virus research. Yes.
>> And that's where you get a Corona virus
leak. I mean, look, this is like where
you really have to think the country's
going to hell in a handbag. That people
stop being able to like form an opinion
based on the facts in front of them,
even if it isn't popular with their best
friend.
>> Well, it's their party, right? It's
their ideology. They they've committed
to one side or another. And either you
you know, you're with the team or you're
not with the team. And if you're with
the team, you have to accept all the
things the team says
>> at your own peril.
>> I mean, you know, it's an existential
risk.
>> Do you know what the case fatality rate
for COVID was? Like the case fatality
rate, it means how many people out of a
100 people that get COVID die?
>> How many?
>> One.
>> One. Case fatality rate of one.
Pneumonic plague, which I write about in
biological war. Mother nature's
pneumonic plague.
100 out of 100 die.
100% case fatality rate. Unless you get
antibiotics
within 24 hours, then it's about a 15%
case fatality rate. But guess what gain
of function does? You can learn how to
outf fox antibiotics
so that you can turn mother nature's
pneumonic plague which used to be
curable with antibiotics to have no
cure. That's the threat level we're
dealing with. And meanwhile people are
taking sides about
what we're talking about a lab leak that
pretty obviously was a lab. Well, first
of all, I didn't realize that CO's
fatality rate was that high. I thought
it was much lower than that.
>> It's about 1%. Well, here's why. Okay,
so one in 100 people who manifested
COVID got it. But CO is also
>> one in 100 people who manifested CO
died.
>> Died. Yes. So like I don't know.
>> Was it really that much?
>> That is the CDC even defense department
statistic. But also keep this into
consideration. Many many people who had
COVID were never symptomatic,
>> right?
>> Like including my fa my 83 year old
father and my son, one of my two sons,
they could both test positive for COVID
and have no symptoms,
>> right? But isn't that a function of the
PCR test being really not designed for
testing for active diseases? And there's
false positives of the PCR test was
somewhere in the 80%.
>> Huge. Huge. I mean, you're I think
bringing up the most important point
about biology,
which is that there's so much
uncertainty. There's so much
uncertainty. I mean, you and I could get
the same pathogen in our lungs. Our
immunity systems are totally different.
Our physiology is different.
So there's no you uncertainty would be
something that you would think would be
sort of factored into public health
officials talking about things like
we're not sure if dot dot dot but
instead they act with this crazy
certainty which is bogus.
>> Well the big the big problem with that
is profit right? There's there was a lot
of profit in being able to point towards
one very particular method, one very
particular treatment and this was the
only treatment and you have to take this
treatment and this treatment is going to
make people an insane amount of money
but that's not why they're pushing it.
They're pushing it for public health.
They really care about you even though
they're going to make hundreds of
billions of dollars.
>> It's the case fatality rate. Is that
what you're saying?
>> Yeah. It says it's 0.1% which was a
fraction of the 1% estimated early in
the pandemic.
>> Yeah, that's what I thought it was. I
thought it was onetenth of 1%.
>> So that makes more sense to me because
otherwise you would have so many people
dead.
>> You know, if you think about 300 million
people, that means we'd have three
million people dead because most people
caught CO.
>> It's interesting because the CDC still
says it's 1%.
>> I think they're full of [ __ ]
>> right?
>> I think they're full of [ __ ] I think
they're just I think the mismanagement
and the just the overall strategy for
dealing with it and dealing with people,
the lockdowns, keeping kids out of
school, masking, all of it was so bad.
It's it's so indefensible that one of
the wildest things now is during this fi
Fouchy trial.
>> You're not seeing any coverage of it on
mainstream media except I saw one of
those stupid panel shows on CNN where
they were saying, "No one cares about
this. We should care about what's
happening right now. America doesn't
care about what happened 5 years ago.
Hey, there's a congressional hearing
going on where a guy's testifying in
front of Congress who got a 10year
complete 10-year immunity for all the
crimes that he possibly could have
committed when he wasn't convicted of
any crimes, which is an incredible
precedent that's never happened before.
You've never had a guy get pardoned for
something that he was never convicted of
for 10 years, anything he did in 10
years. And then you have that same guy
testifying in front of Congress,
pleading the fifth that what color his
tie is. If you don't think that's news,
you're out of your [ __ ] mind. And you
shouldn't be calling yourself the news
cuz you're just a propaganda arm for
whatever pharmaceutical company is
paying for your advertisements. This
you're what you're doing is nonsense.
This is definitely not news. That's a
big issue for most Americans who went
through that. people who lost their
jobs, people who had to take a vaccine
in order to go to work and got sick from
it. People who they couldn't fly, they
couldn't travel, they were vilified,
they were called plague rats because
they were questioning these things. And
here we are. Here we are with CNN
saying, "This is not a big deal. Why are
we concentrating on this? We have so
many issues right now plaguing this
country." Yeah, guess what? We can
concentrate on those, too. We can look
at everything. That's what you're
supposed to do. That's what the news is
supposed to be. you're supposed to be
telling. You're not supposed to be the
arbiters of what we can and can't
concentrate on. That's ridiculous,
>> you know. But what's interesting is I
think the lack of news ends up making
people more curious. So, in other words,
people go to other sources of
information. If they're not going to get
it from CNN, they're going to look for
it themselves because we're naturally
curious, especially something like
COVID. So, I think I kind of get the
sense that people tow certain groups of
people, certainly not me, because you
don't know what my politics are, but
they will tow the party line, but then
they have their own opinion privately.
>> Yes.
>> Um, which is unfortunately what we also
saw from Dr. Fouchy, but that's a
completely different point because he's
a public health official and he
shouldn't be, you know, speaking out of
one side of his mouth and writing in his
journal another thing that he really
thinks. But I think that this human
instinct to want to know the truth about
what happened
must prevail, right? And and that so but
my original point was like
>> why is Dr. Fouchy allegedly the only one
who can really tell us about the Wuhan
lab? Like where's the CIA? Where's the
ODNI? Where's DoD? Where are other
organizations that you know have that
information?
>> Yeah,
>> you know they do. If Fouchi had it, they
had it. Why aren't they bringing that to
the public domain right now?
>> That's a very good question. So, I want
to ask you about this book. Like, what
was your motivation for writing it? How
did you get involved in this? Like, I
know you you pick a subject and you go
deep and you dive deep and then you
write your book. So, why biological war?
>> Yep.
My first six books were written in the
past tense like you know the Nazi
scientists who came to America Area 51.
Um the Pentagon's brain the nuclear war
and biological war are written in the
future. They're scenarios based on
Pentagon war games. And that was me
realizing like there are major
existential threats right now speeding
up at the rate of science which is going
faster every day literally. And so I
modeled the two books after Pentagon war
games and got access to people who
actually run these games at the Pentagon
and learned the sort of holy [ __ ]
People are preparing for the worstc case
scenario and no one knows about it.
>> Is that their job though? I mean that is
their job. They have to be preparing for
the worst case scenario.
>> The real question is are you preparing
by creating it? the defense department
or us.
>> Well, whoever's Yeah. Oh. Um, well, what
I wanted to do first of all was like I'm
just naturally curious. So, I wanted to
know like what are they what how does
that preparation play out? Um, the most
shocking thing about nuclear was to find
out like, oh, there is no plan because
we're all dead. That's literally the
quote from the FEMA director. There is
no population protection planning after
a nuclear strike because everyone's
dead. Don't forget your morals and hope
you stocked Pedialyte. That's what he
told me. Okay.
Bio is totally different.
>> Why Pedialyte?
>> Pedialyte. You know that stuff you give
your kids to drink? Yeah. Electrolytes.
>> Yeah. Not just kids
>> or or [laughter]
you right. That's what he's
>> athletes take it when they cut weight.
>> It's been a while since I've been an
athlete, but yeah. Um, so yeah, that's
what he said. It was like, wow, that's
what they're thinking about nuclear.
It's just
>> why though?
>> I guess for the electrolytes,
>> does that protect I know what is it
iodine that people tell you to take.
>> I always got the sense that the ped I
should have done a follow-up question,
Joe. Why? Why Pedite? I always got the
sense in the same way that when your
kids are babies and they get diarrhea
that you give them pedialyte to like you
know re get their system filled with
necessary electrolytes. M
>> so that's and I also got the sense that
it was like hydration and you know
better than water
>> god
>> but bio I learned is completely
different animal because what they're
really worried about is the secondary
effect of panic and anarchy and that was
really interesting to me because having
written all these books about you know
the defense department and the CIA the
programs are very, you know, they're
very structured and ordered and they
don't take place in the homeland because
we're always fighting wars overseas.
>> So to learn about a program that would
go down in the continental United States
where you know the insurrection act gets
declared, P commatatus gets lifted, the
military takes over um dot dot dot and
then it goes from there. third act of
the book. Spoiler alert, that was
shocking to me. And it was equally
shocking that I could actually get this
information. A lot of it's classified,
but the names of some of the programs
are unclassified. So, the officials that
I interviewed took me up to the edge of
what can be legally known. And I also
got the sense of like oh that the sense
that these former officials are
conveying is the public should know
about this.
My personal interpretation is like let's
stop arguing about stuff that like
doesn't matter and get to the facts and
start realizing where the real threats
are. So their real fear is worrying
about the the aftermath,
worrying about chaos in the streets,
rioting, looting. That's the real fear.
>> That's the real fear. You can search up
any of So there's unclassified pandemic
plans which are done by like FEMA, DHS.
They're always done by former officials,
former SECF, former CDC director sitting
around a table running a war a pandemic
planning game. They do them at the
defense department and they call it a
biological catastrophe war game. Those
are declassified.
All of them that I was looking at
go through the series of events, you
know, outbreak, infection, sort of
everyone trying to mitigate the the the
the release, the spread, and then it
gets to a certain point, in my scenario,
it's day six cuz pneumonic plague is
fast.
There's a point in all these plans where
anarchy and chaos takes over and the war
game ends. ends like, "Oh, and now we're
done here." And I would say as the
journal, like to myself, what happens
next? What happens next? And why aren't
we learning about it? And
>> they don't have any plans for what
happens after anarchy and chaos.
>> They do. They just don't they just don't
have it in the declassified games. And
that's what there's a plan called the
devolution plan.
>> Oh,
>> eyebrows up for a reason.
>> I don't like that word. Think about
evolution. Now put a D in front of it.
>> Yeah.
>> Instead of going forward, you're going
backward.
>> So you've heard of DEFCON, right? Okay.
So Defcon, defense readiness condition.
There's five.
>> Five is the lowest. That's like normal
every day. At 911, we were at three.
Defcon one means nuclear war. There's a
separate structure of readiness
condition called COG con.
probably haven't heard of it because
it's classified.
Stands for continuity of government
readiness condition.
It's got four levels.
Four is every day. One
is insurrection.
The insurrection act gets declared.
Kogcon one is in effect and the
devolution plan happens which I learned
means a subset of pre-desated officials
they know who they are they've signed
contracts they've rehearsed it
go out in the words of the former FEMA
director Kogcon one you send your
devolution crews out they go out to a
hot site warm site or cold site
underground bunkers located around the
United States. This is from an actual
FEMA chief telling me this.
And they set up how to run the
government because the idea is all the
regular government people will probably
be dead of anarchy, insurrection,
pneumonic plague.
>> So they have bunkers
>> and those are classified.
>> The bunkers are
>> where they are. Do you remember there
was the the bunker during after 911
where Dick Cheney was in the bunker?
Yeah. But George Bush was just like
hanging out.
>> They left him I think they left him in
Texas or you know he was on his ranch.
[laughter]
>> He was just out there in the world.
>> You know what I I had someone tell me
where he was and I went through like a
problem with like legal whether I could
say this. So I had to say I was told but
you know it's not verified something
like that. But um one of the CIA spy
pilots, Ken Collins, he famously flew
the ox cart out at Area 51. He told me
that on 911, George Bush was driving
around in Texas, maybe it was in
Florida, in the back of a laundry truck.
That's how they kept him hidden.
>> What?
>> A So did they just have it look like a
laundry truck and it outfitted with like
regular seats in the back and that's how
they drive them around?
>> I mean,
>> a [laughter] bulletproof laundry truck.
No, I think he got like I think it was
like what do we do with him and that
that was what was available. It was a
laundry truck. That's what I was told by
like a very reliable source
>> that was available meaning there was
nothing else available that was
incognito.
>> They were trying to transport him to the
doomsday plane which is where he ended
up going into the doomsday plan and
flying around in circles.
>> They thought that like a caravan of SUVs
would be too obvious.
>> Yes.
>> Wow. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
So, you learn really pretty quickly that
there's all these plans in place, but
then it becomes like ad hoc or like on
the fly in an actual crisis or
emergency.
>> Whoa.
>> Yep. But, okay. You're referring to
Mount Weather. That's where Dick Cheney
went.
>> Okay. What is that?
>> So, Mount Weather is in the mountains
outside of DC. It's like
>> there's mountains outside of DC,
>> right in the Blue Ridge Mountains.
>> Oh, how far are those?
>> 175 miles.
>> Okay.
>> Um, so the Pentagon has an alternate
command center called Raven Rock.
Underground bunker.
>> Okay.
>> That sounds like it's right out of a
video game. It sounds Raven Rock.
[laughter]
>> They probably have put it in a That's a
real like It used to be classified and
no one used to know about it and now
it's kind of like out there. The
official
>> Is this it, Jamie? This is the bunker.
>> Oh, we have a map of it.
>> Yeah,
>> we got blueprints.
>> All sorts of information about it. What
do you want to know? [laughter]
>> 51 miles from DC.
>> How deep does it 51 miles from DC?
>> At least seven levels.
>> Wow.
>> The Oval Office would be at the bottom.
>> That's crazy.
>> So that's where that's where Cheney was
on 911.
>> So is that where like a nuclear bomb
can't get to it?
>> A nuclear bomb would take it all out. In
nuclear war, I'd destroy all of those. I
mean, I don't destroy them. I show you
how they would be destroyed. Russia
would put like five nuclear bombs on
Ravenrock and it would just
>> just boom boom boom boom.
>> That would be it.
>> And also the fires alone would just
incinerate everyone inside.
>> Also like how are you getting your air?
>> Yeah.
>> Where's your air coming from? Your air
is going to be contaminated with nuclear
fallout, right?
>> Yes.
>> Is this what it looks like?
>> I don't know. There's a bunch of Some of
those pictures were coming from Tumblr,
so I don't know what [laughter] else I
think. I think they take the real the
real pictures and then they turn them
into, you know, comic books. But um
>> but you can see some of
>> So look how it's got this like entrance
carved into the side of the mountain
with a big cement wall and he goes
through that.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, we were talking about this um
the other day. Um we we're talking about
Darren Cuyu.
>> Do you know what that is?
>> It's a an underground facility that's in
Turkey. And
>> yes, I do know about that. that they
found by accident. What was it? The
1970s. Yeah. Yeah. [laughter and gasps]
>> They used it. It was being used to hide
people up until the 1920s.
>> Whoa.
>> Yeah. People like the Greeks were hiding
from people invading Greece.
>> So it can
>> or Turkey, I guess,
>> house 20,000 people under there. And
they really don't know why they made it
or who made it.
>> It's
>> Turkey is crazy. It's such a old
civilization with like layers upon
layers upon layers of Just when you
think it's really old, it gets even
older.
>> Well, that's gocappy, right? Where they
they had to redate.
>> Well, they still resist it. What what
constitutes modern civilization or
civilization in general. They were
they're still trying to say some
archaeologists are hanging on tooth and
claw trying to say that hunter gatherers
made these enormous stone columns with
3D drawings that
>> seem to be a calendar of some sort of a
cataclysmic event. So some of the
pictures we were just looking at from
Mount Weather maybe not accurate because
it's also used in the TV show the 100.
>> Oh yeah. So
>> but it is a real
>> but yeah that that's probably where they
get it from. So what we were looking at
I think was the stuff from the TV show.
>> What is that? What's the 100? Uh like a
show like Silo or something where people
you know 100 people left or something
like that I think.
>> Oh that's what we had Tim Robbins on and
we were talking about Silo. [sighs] Have
you seen that show Silo? Not yet.
>> Really good show. It's on Apple and it's
essentially about an underground
civilization that survives some sort of
cataclysm. They don't exactly say in the
beginning. I'm early on the show. They
don't say what the cataclysm is, but
these people have to live like deep deep
deep underground in these
self-containing facilities and you can't
go outside or you die.
>> Um,
>> yes. Reddit about it. So Darren Cuyu
could house 20,000 people and they had
>> they had pastures or or they had storage
like for cattle and grain and water and
wine and oil presses. It was like crazy
[ __ ]
>> And how many thousands of years is it?
They don't even know.
>> They don't know. They don't know who
made it. They didn't know it existed.
They found it. Imagine a a guy, the
initial story was that his chickens had
gone through a hole and he's like,
"Where's these chickens going?" They
never come back. [laughter] And then
>> the disappearing Turkish chickens.
>> So, they knock down these walls and then
they find this thing and they haven't
even explored all of it. They They don't
even have all of it explored yet. It's
insane. It's so big and it's just there
and they don't know why and they don't
know who made it and they don't know
what they were hiding from. This is what
it looks like.
>> Yeah, it's incredible.
>> It's really crazy cuz it's absolutely
enormous.
>> Is this Darren Kui right here? This is
uh like some of the tunnels.
>> Yeah, it's I get confused since they've
only done 10% of it. Like that's
obviously a fake, but I don't know how
much of that is what it is cuz it's
supposed to be underground, right?
>> Yeah, that doesn't look real. That that
seems like somebody made that up. But
the actual image is like that's an image
which is the best Darren Cuyu
underground right there. Point to Yeah,
right there.
That's uh what it really looked like. So
imagine they find this underground and
they don't even know how old it is
because if you find some stuff, you
can't carbonate the walls. You can't
carbonate the carvings. So they have to
find things that are left there. But if
people were hanging out there until the
1920s, like so they really don't even
know if you find something how old it
is. You can guess, but you don't know
like how old was the building when this
person was there. Was it thousands of
years old already? They don't know.
>> Yeah. It's interesting how the
archaeologists that have a like have
skin in the game with with an other
theory resist that and it takes a while.
It's like with Gobeclet, you know, now
there's
>> um investigations going on,
archaeological digs nearby
>> and lo and behold, they're finding other
things which makes me feel like Yeah.
All over the place. Of course, it didn't
exist on its own.
>> Yeah. Of [clears throat] course,
>> some kind of advanced civilization has
neighbors
>> 11,000 plus years ago.
>> So crazy.
>> It's so weird because we keep pushing
the dates further and further back. Like
Graham Hancock always says, stuff just
keeps getting older. And so it makes you
wonder like, have we gone through
something like this before? Whether it's
a natural catastrophe or whatever it
was, you know,
>> remember when we were kids, it was like
the Lasco caves were the oldest thing
ever. I I can't I don't even remember in
France. Remember the drawing of the
bull? Right. Right. Right.
>> I remember that from the history books.
>> That's from that um Herszog documentary.
>> Yes. It's a great one. Amazing.
>> Has he been on this show?
>> No. I want to get him on. I love that
guy.
>> He's the neighbor of my kids.
>> Whoa.
>> Yeah.
>> Well, I don't want to say where he
lives. People go find him. [laughter]
But that's pretty
>> in LA. So, we'll track him down. He's my
favorite documentarian.
>> Oh, absolutely. Grizzly Man's one of my
favorites of all time. Grizzly Man is
epic.
>> Yeah,
>> it's
>> Have you seen Happy People?
>> No.
>> That's a great one, too.
>> Is that new?
>> No. No. It's a few years old. It's Life
in the Tiger. Happy People, Life in the
Tiger. It's about these uh people that
live in Siberia off the Tiger River. And
they're like the happiest people. And
all they do is like hunt and fish and
trap and uh they get together. They have
really strong community. They drink and
they're laughing and they have like no
mental illness. It's it's really weird
as he documents it. He has such Have you
seen little deer needs to fly?
>> No.
>> Oh my god. The only man rescued from
Laos during the Vietnam War. And Herzog
go he's died since Deer. But Herzog goes
with him back into the jungle.
>> Wow.
>> Oh my god. You're going to love it. It's
a treat that you haven't seen it yet.
Little Deer needs to fly.
>> That guy is such a world treasure.
>> Oh my god. Just his voice
>> and like his perspective on everything.
Just when you think just when I think I
know what he's going for, he takes you
like on a complete left turn
>> and you're left like at least for me
thinking about the world in a completely
new original way.
>> Yeah. So these caves in France, they
thought that that was the old but that
was really old, right? Wasn't Wasn't
that like 30 plus thousand year old
drawings?
>> I think maybe Jamie can check for us. I
think they were like 7,000 BC, you know?
So like
>> I think they were older than that.
>> Discovered 1940 by four teenagers closed
in 63
created around 17,000 years ago.
>> 17,000. Okay. Yeah,
>> that's it. God, I thought it was older.
>> That's just a quick explanation.
>> This is the Warner Herszog documentary.
I thought they were like literal cavemen
made it.
>> Well, I mean,
>> so that's only 17,000 years ago.
>> That's what that says. Interesting. God,
I really thought it was a lot older than
that.
>> But then they come up with like the hand
on the cave in Indonesia. I think that's
40,000
>> believed to be 19,000 years ago. That's
interesting. So at one point in time
they thought that was the oldest
>> when I was a kid. I remember that like
>> it's not quite what it says. Says the
painting for the site were duplicated
with the same materials which were used
to believe like
>> which were used 19,000 years. That
doesn't mean
>> Oh, right.
>> It could still be older,
>> right? They knew that they used them
19,000 years ago, but they could have
used them a lot earlier.
>> Right. Right. We don't have documents.
Crazy stuff though. Just imagine like
living back then.
>> It is wild when you think about the
underground bunkers now and you kind It
kind of has this spooky echo as an
archetype of
>> hiding,
>> hiding from the dangers. Yeah. Having a
shelter
>> and hiding from the the the whole that
trope that thought of a bunker
>> is, you know, there's a lot of uh
supposedly wealthy people. Well, they
are wealthy, but supposedly they have
these underground bunkers.
>> That's what you always hear. These rich
people, these billionaires are setting
up bunkers in New Zealand because they
know something's coming. Like, oh,
Jesus.
>> Right.
>> Right. Good luck getting there in time.
>> Yeah. Right. Right. If a [ __ ] goes down
and you happen to be in Hawaii and you
got to get to New Zealand.
>> Also, your bodyguards are a lot stronger
than you are.
>> Well, wouldn't you bring them with you?
>> Yeah, but it's going to be every man for
themsel.
>> Well, wouldn't you have a if you're
going to have that kind of money to make
a Wouldn't you have a bunker that could
house a few hundred people so that you
could,
>> you know, nobody gets insurrection in
your movement?
>> I mean, I suppose if you bring
everybody's family, you have to have a
lot of preparing for this. That's what
really kept taking me back to those docu
the documents in the defense department
about fear of infection creates anarchy
and insurrection because this idea of
like fear of infection.
>> People begin to their mind actually
begins to change in the studies under
scarcity,
>> right?
>> And scarcity coupled with fear of
infection. It's so visceral. It's like
it's as much of an archetype as the
bunker being infected,
>> right? very very different than being
shot at, right? You get the sense if
you're if you can get into the bunker,
if you're being attacked with a physical
weapon, okay, I'm safe now. Close the
doors, make a fire. But with fear of
infection, I mean, a biological weapon
or any pathogen from is a living
munition. It self-replicates and it's
got an incubation period.
>> So then it act right. So then you can be
infected and not know it while it's
incubating inside of your body and then
you infect a bunch of other people as
well.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And we saw during COVID how
aggressive people got screaming at
people for not wearing masks and and you
know that was as far as pandemics go.
Fairly mild.
>> Yeah. Fairly mild. Like I mean if you go
with the CDC's 1% or your.1%
of the or or you know right perplexities
one I mean you're talking about a
nothing burger compared to compared to
plague pneumonic plague and there you
know I mean look I also write in the
book and this has never been reported
before because I interviewed CIA
officers who both debriefed the Soviet
defectors and also people who chased
WMD in the hands of terrorists during
the war on terror. And I specifically
didn't want to write that scenario
because it's so loaded to go with like
terrorist youth use of a biological
Asian. But I give you little history
lessons when I stop the drama. One of
which involves an al-Qaeda terrorist
that was captured. She's actually now in
Texas in a mental institution for the
rest of her life. Her name's Aia Sadiki.
She's an MIT trained biologist
related by marriage to Khaled Shik
Muhammad. Okay. And she was leading the
biological weapons program. This is
according to the CIA officers.
>> She was trained at MIT.
>> She was trained at MIT and then she went
back to Pakistan. She was the first
woman on the FBI's most wanted terrorist
list.
>> How come they have her in a mental
institute?
>> Cuz they caught her. And then this part
is reported. They caught her and
somehow, again, the air quote, somehow
she got a hold of a Marine's rifle and
fire and was firing at the FBI agents
interviewing her. This is all public.
And she was shot. They took her to the
United States, gave her a trial, decided
she was insane, put her in a mental
institution.
But what had never been revealed before
my book is that in her handbag, she had
plans to create a genetically modified
pathogen that mixed rabies with
chickenpox.
>> Think about that. Imagine airborne
rabies. Rabies like pneumonic plague is
one of the only other pathogens that has
a 100% death rate without
countermeasures.
and rabies, like when you see it in
animals. I've never actually encountered
a rabbit animal in the in the wild as as
much as I know.
>> Um, but when you see them, they they
want to infect something else. They get
hyperaggressive. They want to bite you.
>> So, if they bite you, they give it to
you, which is really crazy.
>> Like, this this disease makes them throw
their own safety out the window and just
go after people and try to bite them. I
mean, it's like a it's like rabies is a
s like now its own ra a rabid animal.
You know, you think of it of it's so
visceral. It's going to come at you with
its infected saliva. I almost went with
the rabies scenario because I I always
in these scenarios tie them to actual
events that have happened so that
there's so that readers don't go like
this is Annie Jacobson's dystopian
imagination as much as they say oh she's
following what you know science this is
science fact not science fiction and so
when I learned about that plan for to
for the genetic modification of rabies
and chicken airborne rabies but then I
thought
>> how far did she get along wrong with
this?
>> That is classified, Annie. You know, but
I did get a second person, David
Realman, who's the adviser to the
president on biodefense, to confirm with
me that that was actually located in her
handbag and caused serious concern.
>> Well, now imagine if they never found
her, they never caught her and she
completed that.
>> I mean, it's really terrifying.
>> It wipes [snorts] out most of the
country
>> and also just in the most horrific way.
I mean, you know, like having to like
look at your pet and be like, is my pet
rabbit? It's just
>> Jesus could catch it, too.
>> Another project.
>> Oh, she had another project.
>> Multiple projects, apparently.
>> She had collected materials on viruses
for biological warfare. And one of her
projects is finding its way to infect
America's poultry supplies with an
antibbody that would allow chickens to
pass salmonila onto humans more easily.
She later destroyed her work after
suspecting Abu Lubab was hoping to
double cross her and turn her into the
United States authorities.
>> This is a long Wikipedia with quite a
bit of twist and turns. I'm surprised
it's not a movie. It's a lot going on.
>> Oh my god. And that's one person that we
caught. Now, that's not like this is the
only time they thought of that. This is
the only person that they tried to
recruit to do this kind of stuff.
There's probably someone out there right
now. Mhm.
>> Hence your book.
>> I [clears throat] mean, I interviewed
this guy, very famous, legendary CIA
officer named Ralph Moat Larson, and he
led the
counterw team, right? So, he would go to
places basically like with a bunch of
ground branch guys, CIA paramilitary
guys behind him. He was kind of like the
intelligencia at the front to try to
negotiate with al-Qaeda weapons makers,
biological weapons makers, and say like,
"You can't do this. It's going to kill
all of us." And he he told me a couple
stories, and I write them like history
lessons in the book. Once he went to
Sudan and met with uh the top biological
weapons maker for al-Qaeda and like, you
know, it's just chilling. It's basically
you get the feeling like that Rol said I
got them to agree to stop temporarily
>> temporarily.
>> Temporarily.
[sighs]
>> Sorry, Joe. This is the nightmare stuff.
>> So, what do they think that they're
going to do if they get into these
bunkers?
This is the thing. It's like if society
completely collapses and anarchy just
sweeps the nation and you've got cities
on fire and people killing people and
looting, eventually they're going to run
out of food. Eventually there's going to
be no infrastructure. You've got no
power. You've got no one who's taking
care of the water. No one's taking care
of the satellites. No one's taking care
of anything. The cell phone towers are
down.
>> What are these people in the bunker
going to do? Are they going to reinvent
society?
>> Well, that's the plan down the road. But
before
>> Do they have that? They have part five
of the devolution plan is called
reconstitution.
>> Oh Jesus.
>> So they're going to reconstitute the
government like rise again like a
phoenix from the ashes. But before that
I also learned the government has issued
the rather the Pentagon has issued 1.7
million gas masks to its personnel. So
they fan out across the states, but they
can not really handle the numbers of
people who are actually going to die
pretty quickly. So instead, what their
job is is to protect the critical
infrastructure, all that stuff you
exactly mentioned.
>> So they're just
just assuming that most people are going
to die.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, this is the quote.
This is the exact quote from Colonel Tom
Hehard, who ran uh catastrophic nuclear
and biological war games at the Pentagon
for Do you have you ever heard of a very
famous guy? They called him Yoda at the
Pentagon. He died like a couple years
ago at age 100. His name is Andy
Marshall.
>> No.
>> He ran the office of net assessment.
Talk about a euphemism like or like a
cloaked. That's where they did all the
wargaming. And Marshall, Andy Marshall
did this in the 70s all the way through
his recent death. And Tom Hehard worked
for him. It's in the office of the
Secretary of Defense. So what Hehard
told me is in the event of a biological
catastrophe. And by the way, that
includes not just an attack, but an
incident. And an incident means a lab
leak. Okay? So in the event of a
catastrophic biological incident,
there is very little you can do to
protect the homeland. Only things you
can do to mitigate extermination
>> of the human race.
>> That's his quote.
>> Mitigate extermination.
>> Mitigate extermination.
>> So you want to keep as many people alive
as possible, but it's probably going to
be a very small amount. And it's
probably just going to be the 1.7 people
with the gas mask and a whole bunch of
like Macavelian solopsis.
>> Do you imagine if our society had to be
reinvented
with only people that work in the
government? [laughter]
>> Can you imagine some of the most
incompetent, crooked people in the world
and that's the new society? Well, I have
a feeling most of the bureaucrats would
die because I don't think they could,
you know, take care of themselves,
right? I think the people that would
live would be those well-trained
soldiers.
>> Well, that's not bad. That's probably a
better scenario.
>> But the other problem you're looking at
is reproduction because there's 17%
females in the military.
>> That's not good.
>> That's not good. And then the other
problem is that the other people who are
left that are not in the military are
imagine the skills you have to have to
be able to like deal with fear of
infection
in a manner that you basically have to
be able to as it was said to me kill
people on site like not even worrying
about whether this is where it really
feels like the walking dead or you know
an apocalyptic movie. 28 Days Later was
based on that. But 28 Days Later was a
lab leak.
>> Yes. Yes. That's it.
>> Remember it was called Rage. It was
something they were doing with
chimpanzees and chimpanzeee bite
somebody.
>> That's how it opens.
>> And it spreads.
>> Those are great films.
>> Those are great. You see the new one?
>> Amazing. No, I haven't seen the new one.
>> Oh, the new one. Parts one and two. I
mean,
>> there's parts one and two of the new
ones.
>> Yeah.
>> Oh, is it two-parter?
>> Two-parter. They they released them like
six months apart. Oh, God. They're
incredible. I mean,
>> just get worn out from those kind of
movies.
>> I mean, it's a certain You have to have
a certain
>> Yeah,
>> there's no happy ending.
>> I don't I mean, Joe, I'm an eternal
optimist, believe it or not. I really
am.
>> That's crazy considering your work,
>> but I just figure all of this is a
cautionary tale. And I also figure it's
better to know than to
>> Well, it's better to inform. And I think
you do an amazing job of that. And I
think you're a very important person in
that regard. you inform people of these
things that you really should be
considering that I mean your nuclear war
book freaked a lot of people out that
were kind of you know nuclear war was in
the back of their mind you know yeah
it's a possibility but hey we haven't
done it we dropped a couple of bombs
during the world war II and that's it
we're done with that
>> you know you said something to me last
time we spoke about the nuclear war book
that really stayed with me and it has an
interesting kota so you were like Annie
I couldn't read nuclear war. It freaked
out a lot of my friends. I can't read
it. And then you explained why. And you
said, I'm paraphrasing you, but you
said, I think about those people at
Hiroshima and Nagasaki and they were
just going about their daily life
and all of a sudden they're incinerated.
And that really stayed with me. And I
thought about it. Here's the kod.
The survivors are called habacha. That's
what they call themselves. It's like
survivors of the nuclear bomb. So now
since it was 80 years ago, they're all
like 81 to 90 plus.
And they were stigmatized throughout
their youth because the idea was you're
radioactive, you can't reproduce, you're
sort of, you know, there's like a a
malignant a malignant thing attached to
you. This is what they told me. and I
met them and they um I was invited to
Hiroshima to be the keynote speaker with
the Habacha for the 80th anniversary of
the bombing.
>> What did they say the experience was
like in terms of being maligned? Like
what what was happening to them?
>> Well, the sense I got was very much that
they believed that was accurate. They
had no other information.
They had no other information other than
people telling them, you know,
>> they were radioactive.
>> Yeah. Now, what was also interesting is
a couple of the younger people who were
who don't remember who were like
infants,
their mothers, like let's say one parent
died and another so their one the living
parent would shield them from that by
never telling them that they were
haboka.
So then they had this whole other kind
of realization later in life when they
learned and some of I mean those stories
were like incredible because you're
learning about how like a parents love
for a child means not telling them what
you think would make them feel
stigmatized. But yet you've them
explaining to me that they felt that
stigma throughout their life anyways not
knowing why. I never even would have
considered that stigma. I would have
considered survival's guilt, survivors
guilt, which people do have if you're a
part of a disaster and you're one of the
ones that lived.
>> Yeah.
>> People get survivors guilt. But I never
would have thought of the the stigma of
being maligned as an infected
radioactive person.
>> And Japan has such a different culture.
I couldn't have imagined that either
until I heard it firsthand from the
experience of the survivors.
They sent some of them to an island.
>> Like banished as if you're a leper.
[snorts]
>> How much is this Iran thing freaking you
out?
>> The war?
>> Yeah.
>> Look, I mean, when anyone starts a war,
that's not necessary.
That's the wrong word for it, but you
know, just like this is the whole It's
just a terrible, terrible, terrible
idea. That just seems to me like the
opposite of what the Department of
Defense, it's why I continue to call it
the Department of Defense, by the way,
because it still is in my mind and
certainly until Congress changes the
name,
um, you know, it's supposed to be for
defense,
>> right? So
I think so so much of what I have
written about all the wars since World
War II, I've interviewed hundred or more
people for each of my eight books who
have been in every war. And the big
shift for me like understanding a a
change in mindset was
the Bush Cheney administration
starting the Iraq war. Like I really
believe that many of the problems we're
experiencing today as a society stem
from that. And that has to do with the
fact of all the soldiers that I've
interviewed.
Um there's a there's a completely
different perspective on the government
from those who fought in the wars
leading up to the war on terror.
And the people who
most of them, you know, many of these
people too, like they're mad.
They're really mad that they were used.
That's a sense that I get now, not
everyone, but a majority
are very angry and feel used. And that
is a fundamental warping of what the
military is.
>> Yeah, without a doubt. And also no clear
way to resolve this at all.
>> Yes.
>> And it seems like our stock piles are
running dry.
You know, we're
bases are getting blown up by drones.
>> I heard, you know, um I heard Joe Kent,
who was the number two at ODNI, who
resigned. I heard him say a really
interesting thing
about the warrior class that I hadn't
you know when you just like have all
this information but you didn't put
something together and then you hear it
and you're like of course and what Joe
said was one of this was in reference to
Trump maybe saying there was going to be
or someone in this administration saying
there should be a draft and everyone
freaking out and saying like that's you
know that's outrageous and Joe Kent's
point was really interesting. He said
there should be a draft but not for
reasons you think. And he said
presently America has a warrior class
and Joe Kent is in it. Meaning you know
these are like a don't have the exact
statistic 1% less than 1% of families
who are in the military. And he said
Kent said you know we socialize with one
another. Our kids socialize with one
another. We go to school with one
another. We go to war with one another.
We talk together. We have parties. And
we know something about America that is
completely foreign to all the other
families. And it's a it's there's
something wrong with that. And I've
really thought about that a lot since
and I agree with him. And his point
about the draft was
if everybody
knew and experienced what we experience
in our families talking about war versus
peace.
Wars would be looked at differently.
>> Instead of thinking we should go to war
like a Lindsey Graham type perspective
whereas no real skin in the game. He's
not going to go get shot. No one he
knows is going to go get shot.
Yeah,
>> absolutely.
>> Makes sense.
>> So, that's kind of my answer to, you
know, and I like I I'll see a headline
that's like the war in Iran cost us XYZ
billion dollars and it's like it doesn't
even mention all the people dying. You
know, there's like 10 and and yes, the
Americans, but like it's just talk about
misreporting,
>> right? It's just talking about money,
which is crazy.
>> Which is crazy. Which is crazy.
And then it also the real problem is it
makes America an enemy and it makes us
less safe because America has done this
thing this unprovoked attack and so now
they have a reason to attack back. It
it's it's very like slippery, you know?
It's like untrustworth. I mean, I always
go back to like the way you behave with
your family is the way that you should
present to the world. Otherwise, you're
being a hypocrite. [snorts]
And the idea that we're we as a country
are kind of like you're not really sure
what we're up to. And and then it's
changing. It's like radically changing.
one the pendulum swings so far from what
one administration's
um you know list of really important
things is to another. I mean it must
from an outside perspective
it must be really schizophrenic looking.
>> Yeah.
So to get back to your book, um how many
different countries do we know are
involved in this kind of biological war
research?
>> So for starters, biological war is
illegal. Biological weapons are illegal,
unlike nuclear weapons, believe it or
not, are perfectly legal for the
countries that have them. Wrap your head
around that. But everybody signed a
treaty in 1972 called the biological
weapons convention treaty saying we will
not make biological weapons. They are
odious to the conscience of mankind.
At that point the Soviets signed the
treaty cross their fingers behind their
back and made a ginormous biological
weapons program that you talked about
earlier. Okay. America allegedly
destroyed her arsenal of of of
biological weapons, which took 219 weeks
to destroy, by the way. Um, and not for
another 20 years did we learn that
actually the Soviets were running this
biological weapons program. And we only
learned it because of the Soviet
defectors. The CIA had no idea. Defense
Department had no idea. So we had
completely stopped all of that work
>> according to the documents, according to
anyone you interview. We had stopped
biological weapons.
>> What year was this whole? [snorts]
>> Nixon made a declaration in 1969. Like
we're just giving up our biological
weapons program. And then everyone else
followed suit and the treaty came about
in 1972.
>> But the Soviets continued their work.
The Soviets not only continued, they
just like they like went bang on it and
they later called it their Manhattan
project.
>> And weren't there boweapons labs in
Ukraine?
>> You're talking about recently?
>> Yeah. That the United States was
involved in.
>> What there are are there are biolog
there are biosafety labs. Okay. So your
original question was where are they
around the world? So, so they're they're
illegal. But what isn't illegal cuz this
is a carve out in the treaty. You can do
research for prophylactic purposes for
medical counter measures. That's the
carve out. So that's where we've gotten
to gain of function. You see
>> like, oh, we're just doing this for
prophylactic purposes.
>> That's how the DoD gets involved.
>> Okay. So
before 9/11, 9/11 factors into this and
so does Dick Janie because before 9/11,
America had two BSL for labs, bio safety
level four. That's the highest level.
That's like you saw the suits, the
tubes, your arms are in the boxes.
You're taking a sha chemical shower
before you go in. America had two. One
at Fort Dietrich, that's the DoD's lab.
one at the CDC in Atlanta. That's the
civilian lab. 9/11 happens. Remember the
anthrax attacks
>> never solved. Thank you, FBI.
Dick Cheney personally is terrified of
bioweapons.
and he spearheads the efforts for this
giant biological military-industrial
complex that then takes off and begins
with billions of dollars pumped into
gain of function type research and
America goes from having two BSL labs to
having 15 and the world follows suit. So
there are 110
BSL4 labs around the world including in
countries that are at war.
>> And this is all post Bush
administration.
>> Post Bush ad. That is when it took off.
That is when it took off.
>> Wow.
>> So America has a hand in the blossoming
of this problem. Most certainly. And
then when you find out that so you think
BSL4 okay well BSL3 that just must be
like you know chickenpox no in the BSL3
labs you can work with plague anthrax
haunt virus like serious diseases that
allegedly have cures
and so you know how many BSL3 labs there
are in the United States of America
right now
>> how many
>> 1,500
>> 1,500
Oh,
>> and around the world there are 3,500.
90% of them have no guidelines for
safety.
>> Did you hear about the story where there
was a man in Vegas that had a bolab in
his garage
>> in California? In California?
>> Both. Both. Both.
>> Another one.
>> They're both there. And they were
seemingly linked.
>> Oh boy. [clears throat]
>> Possibly tied to California case.
Federal Chinese investigation.
>> Yeah. Wait till I show you what's at the
bottom, too. [snorts] Oh boy. Jamie, why
you doing this to me?
>> O,
>> no case appeared filed in state federal
court as of Sunday.
>> Like it's and I didn't really see a
follow-up.
>> I haven't seen the dead mice, Jamie.
What are the What's with the dead mice?
>> Thousand dead mice. There's vials
including HIV, malaria.
>> Well, the crazy thing is the guy who
they caught, they didn't arrest him.
Like there was an Israeli guy. So, this
says Chinese investigation, but one of
them was a guy who was an Israeli guy
who they caught and they sent him away.
He just they didn't prosecute him. He
took off.
I mean, this stuff is so thinly reported
and it's always got like a giant
sensationalist clickbait type headline
and people read about it and know about
it a little bit and then the real
reality behind it, I think, gets
completely lost, which is that the
bottom line is that the barrier to entry
in the biological weapons field is so
incredibly low.
It's horrifying. Like, think about what
you need to have a nuclear weapon.
>> A lot.
>> I mean, look at Iran right now. Okay,
you have to have enriched uranium or
plutonium. You have to have visile
material. Then you have to have a weapon
system. You have to have an ICBM or a
submarine or a B2 bomber.
Nuclear weapons are tightly controlled
by a nation's command and control
structure.
All subject matter experts I interviewed
for this book expressed their serious
concern that the barrier for entry is so
low that basically a given computational
systems AI enabled bio
basically a high school student with
limited knowledge of biology can make a
bioweapon in their basement
or in the Vegas apartment building.
Well, this guy had it in his garage
and they caught him.
>> And what was he doing? Do we know?
>> I don't know. They they they referenced
it as a storage facility.
>> And they said that was
>> I was Yeah, it said storage facility.
>> Yeah, it said not a laboratory. Adding
that the samples and equipment suggested
no active work was happening there. But
it says I think the question is why does
somebody have these materials in a
private residence? It's not a doctor,
not a lab, not a licensed medical
facility of any sort. This uh guy
>> and it's a great question and I wonder
what the answer is.
>> Um I also think it was like an Airbnb or
something. [laughter]
>> That's kind of like the it gets lost in
like who owned the LLC, who owned it.
They said the guy who was running it
doesn't own it. And
>> 1200 samples. Oh god.
>> So this is what was he doing?
>> What was he doing?
>> I don't know. But I think they released
him. That's what's crazy.
the guy in Vegas was released. Is that
correct?
>> That's what I was trying to say. When I
Googled that, I didn't really see a
followup on like anything updated or new
since
>> I'm pretty sure they I'm pretty sure the
guy in Vegas was an Israeli citizen and
he was released. So, the question is
like what was he doing
>> and he was caught? But that's just one
guy that was stupid and got caught. How
many people are doing that? How many l
are there? Sleeper labs all across the
country.
>> Ory Solomon charges dropped. It says on
the property manager.
>> Whoopsies.
>> Maybe it's just because he's the
property manager.
>> Yeah, no big deal. He didn't do anything
>> without prejudice. Still faces criminal
charge in Clark County for improper
disposal of hazardous waste.
>> But didn't he leave and go back to
Israel?
>> Oh, I mean, this is just I'm looking at
the
>> I think that [snorts] was the
allegation. He's due back in court on
June 4th, which was
>> months ago.
>> Yeah. So, I don't that's See, I didn't
see anything about it. I'll look it up.
>> Yeah. Nothing to see here. It says an
Israeli citizen, right? Did it say that?
Go back to Right. We just
>> citizen on a non-immigrant visa is not
allowed to possess firearms. Prosecutors
say multiple guns were seized from his
home. [laughter]
>> Well, you got to have guns if you've got
plague.
>> You got to look out for your for your
stock.
>> Guard your plague.
>> But, you know, I stayed away from that
kind of lone actor crazy because It's a
lone actor.
>> I mean, exact. You don't know. And
>> well, if it was, would you think they'd
let him go?
>> That's That's my question. If it's a
lone actor, would they really let him go
or is he connected to somebody and
that's how he got out? I mean, one of
the problems of the overpoliticization
of everything is that it just seems like
anything important becomes splatter and
becomes secondary to some of these other
concerns that seem to take headlines,
right? Like that should be a big story.
And yet all any of us ever heard was,
"Did you hear about the crazy bolab?"
>> Right?
I can tell you that the bigger story is
really, at least to my eye, you know,
because this is another one. Oh, thank
God nothing got out. Thank god no one
was infected. But the real issue is what
happens if someone does get what happens
if a pathogen gets seated in the
community, right?
>> And an outbreak starts to move to an
epidemic. And you know the I write in
the end of the book, Joe, the point is
not panic. This is of course after I
take you through like the worst
dystopian nightmare ever. The point is
pressure. Pressure to understand the
threat, the the labs around the world,
the bureaucracy involved, all the
different problems that would come up of
mitigating the threat so that you can be
informed and also say like, wait a
minute, something really needs to be
done and needs to be looked at here. and
PE and instead people are arguing about
the most obvious thing in the world to
my eye. You know what happened in the
Senate yesterday? Like that is pretty
obvious. What happened? What is being
covered up? We were misled. And yet all
of this in I'm not saying to skip over
it, you know, but
it's it's like how much effort do we put
on something
without a resolution? That's what
confounds me.
>> Yeah, it's a really good question. And
the fact that there's so many labs in
this country and that they've all sprung
up post 2001.
>> They moved that Plum Island lab, by the
way, to Kansas
and it open it either just opened or is
about to open. It cost an extraordinary
amount of money.
>> And are they doing the same research?
>> Yes. Yep. They moved it off of Plum
Island and now it's in Kansas.
>> Do you know anything about this alpha
gal tick? This lonear tick that gives
people this uh allergy to red meat.
>> A little bit. A little bit in as much
that it's a parasite which is different,
you know, if it's a bug, which is
different than a germ. Um, but I think
it speaks to
this idea that sort of there are natural
things that are happening in our
environment
and then there are also unnatural things
and the inability to differentiate
between them or trust. Look, so much of
all this has been about trust the
science and then okay, we can't trust
the science unfortunately
around CO and we're all waiting for a
reckoning around CO. It's obviously not
coming anytime soon. And in the
meantime, you have, you know, the
lettuce outbreak, you have the
alphaagal, you have legionnaire's
disease from data centers in your,
there's an influx of
health concerns coming from mother
nature herself.
Here we are in this world of incredible
science and technology. I mean, I talked
to biotechnologists who, by the way,
really have a utopian take on this. Now
there is lots of money involved for them
but they really believe that they that
science is the answer and can be the
answer to a lot of these problems. I was
I sat next to a guy at dinner a couple
nights ago who told me that his company
in San Diego has a counter measure for
alpha. I have no idea of verifying this.
This just happened but that the reason
they can't get it through is because of
insurance. You know, one of the
treatments that's supposed to be very
effective is acupuncture on your ears.
>> On your ears?
>> Yeah. See if you can find anything on
that. I I read about this that there's
like a 90%
remission that uh one guy's been able to
achieve through acupuncture on your
ears, which is like what do you what
like hey whatever works, but is this
real? acupuncture. Uh acupuncture
specifically a specialized ear technique
called uh Saliman
oric orurricular allergy treatment is
being explored by integrative
practitioners to help manage and
potentially achieve remission for alpha
gal syndrome though it's not yet a
standard medically proven cure. How it
works for alpha gal. Targeted ear
points. provider locates a specific
highly reactive electrical point on the
outer ear associated with the alpha gal
immune response.
>> Acupuncture is so weird because it seems
to be doing something.
>> Do you have acupuncture?
>> No. No. I had it done once, but the guy
was a cook and I never went back.
>> I feel like acupuncture is so old and
comes from such a long
>> history of experiences. I I have
acupuncture and it just seems like
anytime I go for anything, someone wants
to give me drugs, which I'm not a fan
of, I go to the acupuncturist.
>> Sure, call it the placebo effect or call
it whatever you want, but it certainly
works for me.
>> I don't necessarily think it's a
placebo.
>> I think a lot of that really old stuff
we like to dismiss because we like
petroleum based pharmaceutical drugs
because that's what the doctor gives us
as standard of care. I I have a feeling
there's a lot lot of real this been
around too long for them to just keep
faking it.
>> I mean it if it works it works.
>> Yeah. Right.
>> Well, if this if it turns out that this
ear technique
>> actually Yeah. puts Alpha Gal in
remission, maybe people will take that
stuff more seriously and
>> start using acupuncture for other
because I know a lot of people swear by
it. And I'm always I just kind of raise
my eyebrow like all right, good luck.
But maybe that's just me being ignorant.
And definitely that's me being ignorant.
A specialized ear acupuncture method
method called the Solomon aruricular
allergy treatment shows a high reported
success rate of about 85 to 96% for
putting alpha gal syndrome
>> syndrome symptoms into remission.
>> That's pretty crazy. Yeah.
>> I mean I don't know who did the study.
How what
>> I like it. I like that that's out there
because I always feel like the the
acupuncturists are sidelined because
they're not part of the in the medical
insurance military industrial
>> complex. Small needle stays in your ear
for three to four weeks.
>> Oh wow.
>> It's not just like a treatment.
>> It's secured with a small adhesive
bandage.
>> Wow.
>> Interesting.
>> Wow.
>> Tiny little needle.
>> Hair thin stainless steel needle. Huh.
>> 137 patient trial. Looks like
>> I wonder how how who [ __ ] figured
that out.
>> Do you know anyone who's gotten alpha
goals?
>> Yes, a good friend of mine.
>> Yeah, he has it.
>> And what? He's become deathly allergic
or
>> Oh, yeah.
>> deeply allergic.
>> Well, I mean, it doesn't kill him, but
it wrecks him. And so, he got over it um
and started eating meat again. And then
he came back with a vengeance. Came back
even worse than it was before. So, it
went into remission and then it came
back. And you know, he's really like
tightened up his diet and done
everything. One thing that really helped
him was plasma feresis. Do you know what
that is?
>> It's uh they take your blood and they
filter out the plasma and replace it.
Yeah. I had it done. I done done for fun
just to see what it feels like. Um and
you get really tired the next day.
That's one thing. But then the day after
that, oh my god, you feel amazing. You
feel like like you've just lost 20 years
of age. Like it really feels incredible.
you have so much energy. It's really
odd. Whatever it is, it's doing
something. But people that have
autoimmune issues, people that have
allergies, people that have a lot of
different weird things, apparently they
have some uh great responses from that.
But my friend uh you know, he struggled
with a bunch of different things and
getting his blood work and lab work
done. He was also uh in the military and
spent a lot of time overseas and one of
the things that he found out is uh PAS,
PFAS, uh these forever chemicals that
you get from plastics. He's got
>> burning plastics.
>> Well, it's not just that. It's also just
hot water. So, like they take these
bottles of plastic, bottles of water in
cases and they've got them sitting out
in the sand in the sun in Afghanistan
and Iraq and that's their water supply.
So, they're drinking this water that's
been sitting out in the sun that's
leeching in these plastic bottles. So he
found out that his PAS levels were off
the charts and that's because, you know,
he was deployed overseas all those years
drinking that water.
>> Did you see this about the PAS
chemicals? I just saw this come out, so
I don't know that how tested it's been,
but someone's figured out a way to get
almost all of it out
>> of water, but not your body. Right.
>> Well, that's how it's getting in mostly.
So,
>> right. But the the problem is once it
gets in your body, it's the problem.
Scientist because my friend still I mean
Evan has it in his body.
Scientists have developed a clever new
way to trap forever chemicals in water
using nanoized cages that lock onto PAS
molecules. Unlike current methods, this
approach can capture short chain PAS,
the hardest type to remove. Test show
that it can eliminate up to 98% of these
pollutants and still work after multiple
uses. The discovery could lead to more
effective water filtration systems
worldwide. Well, that's good news.
Science technology.
Yeah, we
>> dual use. It can be good. It can it can
help you or harm you or kill you.
>> And there's some brilliant people out
there that are figuring out ways to
mitigate all the stupid things that we
do like that.
>> Yeah.
But people, you know, this the whole new
creeping up of new diseases emerging in
sort of like in pockets of the country
and feeling like the CDC or the HHS has
no real lid on it or no real
explanation. I think kind of seriously
undermines
the general wellness of the nation.
>> Oh, for sure. Well, that was a big
problem with CO is that this feeling of
the fear and anxiety affected people's
immune systems as well. Affected their
their depression levels, affected their
happiness, like just their overall feel
and anxiety. I mean, how much of an
affect just the the cortisol boost go
>> all the different things that are
happening that's stressing out your body
because of that pandemic that we don't
even consider as being part of that
experience. I think also when you like
okay can I give you an anecdote because
this comes to mind about what you're
saying is like that idea that there's
uncertainty okay and uncertainty raises
your cortisol levels and even worse is
when you're uncertain about something
you're being told is true but you're
like I'm uncertain that is like a even
more anxiety making right
>> one of the things that's stunning to me
is how the CDC and the WHO they're
supposed to be these pillars of sort of
the north star of you know public health
at least they certainly were when I was
a kid you really looked up to these
organizations okay co happens
this the WH and the CDC both issue
they're tweeting out three months into
the pandemic co not airborne not is in
capital letters I have a copy of the
tweet in the book because no one really
believes this unless they see it Okay.
COVID was airborne. COVID was airborne.
That is how we all got co it is in make
something incredibly pandemic. Okay.
Instead, they said
you get remember you get COVID from like
touching surfaces.
>> We're all like out buying Lysol.
>> The CDC went into a partnership with
Lysol. Lysol disappeared from the supply
chain.
We now know that's actually called
fomite transmission. That's the
scientific term for getting something
off a surface.
We now know that 1 in 10,000 cases of
COVID was transmitted from a surface.
How can they have gotten it so wrong is
a question everybody should be asking.
And the explanation because by the way
the WHO didn't change. They kind of
quietly about nine months later started
saying COVID was airborne. Same as CDC.
They never said like look we're really
sorry we made a serious mistake and
here's why. And I called both the CDC
and the WHO looking for an explanation
and asking why they never made an
apology and no answer. And I think
that's like what we're talking about.
Talk about raising cortisol levels.
>> Yeah.
>> You know, when your institution
is completely wrong. And by the way, I
don't think it was nefarious. They
literally didn't know or they had their
panel of experts
disagreeing to such an extent that they
just went with not airborne as opposed
to airborne. Well,
>> it does weird you out that they were in
a partnership with Lysol.
>> I had to report that in the book because
that is
>> you just to start thinking about profit
motives.
I mean, if I had to guess, it was
convenient to have a partnership with
them.
>> I don't have any reason to believe that
they were like, "Let's say it was fomite
transmission and partner up with Lysol,
but I certainly if you're Lysol, you're
going to probably go, hey guys, let's
partner together."
>> But, you know, it disappeared from the
supply. I remember trying to buy Lysol
and not being able to at Target. Well,
you remember how much hand sanitizer was
everywhere? Everyone was squirting that
stuff. Now, it turns out hand sanitizer
is just not good for you.
>> Abs. And I still see people using hand
sanitizer all over the place. Bottles of
it like in corporate places. It's really
bad.
>> Yeah. It's your skin is an organ
>> and you're taking this stuff that just
nukes all of your skin flora
>> and you're just wiping your hands with
it and rubbing it all over. You're like,
that's not good.
There's nothing good about that. Wash
your hands. [ __ ] soap. Use some soap
or not. Don't worry about it as much.
>> It seems like the common sense part of
health is kind of gone out the window. I
saw this article the other day which was
talking about how kids our age. You
remember like I went to a play I grew up
in rural Connecticut and like the
playground was like dirt, right? There
were like monkey bars,
>> dirt, you know what I mean? You were
like you got dirty. I would like
>> yeah and now it's like you know fake
whatever that stuff is
turf
>> and this scientific study that I came
upon when I was look when I was working
on this was like that actually that dirt
is really good for you
>> you know [laughter] right like surprise
surprise we've evolved yeah
>> we have evolved by you know dealing with
germs
>> well that's why kids are always putting
things in their mouth and touching
things like it's actually probably good
for them to be exposed to all these
different bio bio things, these
different, you know, whatever it is,
bacteria and germs and it's strengthens
your immune system.
>> It's it's kind of common sense, too. You
know,
>> like the pacifier rule, you know, when
you're a new mom and it's like if it
fell on the floor for like I mean, it's
kind of gross, but 3 seconds then it's
fine, right?
>> That one's probably not so good. Well,
the a certain amount of exposure does
strengthen your immune system. And kids
that are just living in these completely
sterile environments, you got to think
that they have an atrophied immune
system because their immune system is
not having to battle this stuff.
>> Mhm.
>> We just we're terrified of what we don't
know. And that's part of the problem
with having bad experts or experts that
have
>> really flawed approaches. I mean, that's
what was so interesting writing this
book because I learned so much about
biology and about physiology, right?
Like h we're we all deal with disease so
incredibly differently. There is not a
set, you know, pathogen A impacts people
differently. And why there isn't more of
that, why people don't lean into that
mother nature mystery more and I'm
talking about public health officials
I don't understand because what has
happened I see in society is it's
created this fracture where you're
either following a sort of set of
scientific data which just came from a
one lab or one group of scientists.
You're either following that or you're
you're you're somehow having an
alternate narrative that
is actually like somehow harmful. And it
couldn't be more the opposite,
>> right?
>> It couldn't be more the opposite. And
when the [ __ ] hits the fan, you need a
kind of unity among people. You need a
sense of like okay well we all disagree
and we all have different immune systems
but what's best for the kind of greater
the collective right
>> and that's just gone now that is
completely gone and I find more than
anything that people the Fouchy hearings
in point like instead of being like hm
maybe I need to change my mind about
this people are like well if it serves
my side I'm going to go louder and if it
doesn't serve my side I'm going to move
on to something else.
>> Yeah, I've seen people talk about what
um a travesty bringing him in front of
the Congress and having him question
like that and how much good he's done.
I've seen people like making these
statements online. I'm like, what what
are you seeing that I'm not seeing? Cuz
I'm not seeing that. I'm seeing someone
who doesn't want to tell the truth and
someone whose emails show a completely
contradictory version of what happened
versus what he's publicly stated before,
including when he was testifying before
under oath. So, he really should be
charged with perjury. But because of
this whole 10-year immunity thing that
he got, he doesn't have to worry about
any of that. which is also weird because
the immunity the the pardon is supposed
to pro protect you from being prosecuted
but then you're no longer supposed to
have the fifth amendment.
>> Yes. I mean those legal things will play
out. They will take a lot of time, you
know, and that is that will go on. What
I also want to know is because none of
these things happen in a vacuum, right?
And it reminds me a little bit of that
um phrase, you know, when the rats jump
off the Titanic, right? as it was
sinking because I have a little
different experience. I watch different
individuals certainly in the news
carefully of like who's changing because
I just want to learn from it. I don't
report it. I'm just eyeing it. And I'm
seeing people kind of decide, oh maybe
now I'll say a little more about ant,
you know, Fouchy, right?
>> Because I do think that people end up
having a they will go where the
collective is going, right? If their
party starts to turn, okay? And because
I don't have write about politics at
all, I I'm not involved in this. But
it's observationally it's interesting to
me. But for this reason in particular is
that why was Fouchy in charge? Who there
are other people who are responsible for
letting him be in charge? Like having
studied the bureaucracy of what happens
in a pandemic in a biological incident,
which this was
there there's no reason that he was in
charge. There's not doctrine that put
him charge in charge. It was kind of
like a group. Okay, he'll be in charge.
Really, the person in charge is the
secretary of HHS. That is the person in
charge. In fact, Joe, I was invited to
the White House last week, right? They
asked me to come and bring some copies
of biological war scenario.
I went.
>> Did you meet with Trump?
>> No, I didn't. I met with HHS. I met with
the chief technology officer of HHS and
they said in their original email, you
know, we're the ones that would be in
charge in the event of this kind of a
thing, which I know from having reported
it. So, they're in charge. Why did
Fouchy get to take
the torch?
>> Why do you think?
>> I don't know, but it should be looked
at. In other words, he yes, we all know
that he was in charge and he was always
but what I don't understand is in a
billion actually trillion dollar HHS by
the way has a budget that's twice the
size of the defense department twice the
size of the defense department
and so and it defaulted to Fouchy who
was head of NIH then retired and then he
was just chosen as like the president's
lead medical counsel or medical
professional. So in other words, a group
of people put him into that position.
Who are they? Why? What do they have to
say about this?
Yeah, I'm I'm sure part of it was just
they needed someone to take the reigns
and he was more than willing to do it
and probably confidently stated how he
would handle it and what we were going
to go do and how to go about it
>> and didn't
also have an opinion like what if they
saw the John Stewart episode where you
know like even if they didn't have an
opinion before why didn't they have an
opinion after and why why did everybody
just fall into line like sheep. That's
really more interesting to me at this
point. In addition to the individual
being held responsible for obviously
misleading the public and creating a
conspiratorial situation, conspiring is
simply two or more people working to
conceal the truth. Right?
>> It's an actual conspiracy.
That's a weird thing too that people
resist the term conspiracy and they
think it's foolish.
>> It's a legitimate term. I mean, I think
when people call other people conspiracy
theorists, they should just say they
have an alternative narrative.
>> Yeah.
>> That's all that is. But an actual
conspiracy is a legal term.
>> Well, not only that, there's a huge
amount that you can point to in history
where where there were really people
conspiring. Huge amount of stories. And
the reason why it's legally, you know,
it's a really difficult situation and it
needs to be looked at is because one
person, you know, it can keep a secret,
right? But when multiple people are
involved and a conspiracy is involved,
you are actively working as a group to
mislead and then it becomes easier, more
powerful, more effective. And so those
other scientists, you know, we now know
on the record that there were a dozen
scientists that Fouchi looked at looked
to to give him information about lab
leak versus wet market. 10 of them went
with lab leak. Two of them leaned toward
>> natural spillover.
>> Natural. Fouchi wanted it to be natural
spillover. You know, that's where you
could say then there began and again I'm
just talking legal terms. I'm not a
lawyer, but like they began to conspire
to change the story, right? Just look at
the numbers.
>> Yes.
>> Look at the numbers.
>> Yeah.
>> And so what about that? you know,
because I think if you're just going to
have a single fall guy, you're really
not going to be doing much for the
future to have people,
you know, a group of people say, you
know, I don't want to be part of this
conspiracy
because that's an important individual
stance that can be taken by many people
and we see that among you said you have
friends who don't want to kind of take a
position because they don't want to be
associated with that group or that
group. Well,
>> you know, if it starts in the center and
there's responsibility for the group, I
think that makes people think more
open-mindedly in the future.
>> Well, the problem was these people's
career depended upon them towing the
line. And if they stepped outside of
Fouch's jurisdiction, power, they were
[ __ ]
>> Absolutely.
>> That's the real problem. and and he
clearly did that to people like Jay
Badacharia and all these different
people that got kicked off of Twitter
and maligned people that were like
serious experts that disagreed with a
lot of different aspects of the
pandemic.
>> I mean people's they they attempted to
ruin people's careers. Yeah.
>> I mean it's so bizarre that it comes
around full circle and now the people
whose career you tried to ruin has your
job. I mean that's like a cycle of
revenge that
>> Oh Jun, you know or or I mean that's
great like for for revenge TV but it's
not great in a democracy.
>> Well, we're fortunate that it turned out
that way but it didn't have to. I mean
if Kla Harris had won it wouldn't have.
It would have been a totally different
administration
>> and it would probably been the same
people that were there during the Bond
administration plus. And that it's that
the term conspiracy theory became a
porative really during the Kennedy
assassination because there was a bunch
of people that didn't buy it and they
got maligned. They got labeled as
conspiracy theorist. So then that's when
that term became this thing that you
would apply to cooks cuz a conspiracy is
a real thing. A conspiracy theorist.
It's like saying I'm a murder theorist.
Oh, murder. Get [laughter] out of here.
There's no murder. You're a murderer.
When was the last time you saw a murder?
Have you ever seen a murder? Shut up.
Why are you worried about that? It's
really kind of the same thing because
people 100% like you could point to
Enron. You could point to the weapons of
mass destruction thing in Iraq. You
There's a lot of conspiracies that have
proven to be a group of powerful people
who conspired to mislead people.
>> It's a serious charge. I mean, when they
take down mafia bosses, they take them
down on fraud, racketeering, and
conspiracy.
>> Exactly. I mean, it's just a natural
thing that people do to protect their
own interests or to make money or to
hide a crime or whatever it is. It's
normal.
>> It's it's interesting if you change it
around and you say they were conspiring.
It doesn't have the same stink,
>> right? Which is essentially what that
group of scientists were doing. They
were conspire. We now know from
documents
that we have seen revealed by the Senate
in the past couple weeks that this group
of scientists were conspiring
to mislead the public.
>> Right?
>> That is just if you keep it simple on
that and you even take the names out,
that is a serious and then you might
say, wait, what were what were they
conspiring about? Oh, a pan the origin
story of a pandemic which killed all
these people, you know, deprived kids
across America of education, normal
education for several years. Um, ruined
businesses and kept people from seeing
their loved ones.
>> There was also a conspiracy to terrify
people, to make it seem like the disease
was more deadly than it was. They knew
that the infection or the death rate was
much lower than what they were
proclaiming. They also knew that it
wasn't dangerous for kids. And yet they
kept kept saying that kids are dying.
They kept saying kids are going to die.
Everyone's going to die. They they
wanted us to be scared, which is really
terrifying. It's a big part of it. Like
how much could have been changed? How
much that could that pandemic how much
different would it have been if that
wasn't the case? If if we had approached
it the way we understand COVID now and
if they had said listen one of the big
things is your immune system and America
needs to be aware that we have very
nutrient poor diets a lot of us we're
not taking care of ourselves and
ironically the thing is they wanted you
to isolate and stay indoors well outside
is how you get vitamin D you get it from
the sun that's the best method of
getting vitamin D and it's actually good
for your immune system to be outside so
you're supposed to be taking care of
yourself is supposed to be eating vit
vitamins and nutrients. And how many
more people would have survived if they
had just did that? How much lower would
that death rate have been if they had
promoted the use of vitamin D along with
K2 and magnesium, all these different
things like people need to exercise,
need to drink more water, be more
hydrated, take care of yourself, get
sleep, all these things affect your
immune system. And then on top of that,
alcohol consumption went way up during
COVID because people were locked up at
home and they were just getting hammered
all the time. I mean the whole thing
like it was a real disaster when you
think of it was a catastrophe the way it
was handled
>> it was a financial catastrophe for small
businesses and restaurants
>> but do you find that people just like
sort of it's like denial
yeah
>> yeah there's a lot of people that don't
want to think about it because it was so
weird like uh I every now and then um
you know I watch a lot of uh fights for
my job and because I love it But uh I'll
watch fights that took place during the
pandemic and you see all the corner
people with masks on and they're
screaming with masks on. They pull their
mask down when they're yelling out
instructions and they have to pull their
mask back up and it's so weird to see a
bunch of people just walking around with
masks on. It's so that to me is that
that's a great encapsulation of how
chaotic that scene was cuz the mask
didn't work at all. So, they weren't
doing anything good for you, but yet
everybody had to have one
>> and you had to show that you were on the
right side by wearing a mask. I sent a
video to a friend of mine um the other
where group chat the other day of this
uh really kooky left-wing group that
demands masks at all their gatherings
and they had, you know, like boxes of
masks. They're still they're all wearing
masks and they're talking with masks.
And then there's this uh left-wing
martial arts class that I follow on
Instagram and they do their martial arts
with masks on. So they're training.
They're doing jiu-jitsu with masks on.
Like this is hilarious. This is so
crazy. But they're just committed to it.
And I say what I've always said is that
the mask is the left-wing MAGA hat.
>> It's a MAGA hat. It's just for to let
people know that you're a progressive.
You're a leftist. I'm going to wear a
mask everywhere. instead of wearing them
in these big meetings that they're
doing. They're wearing them when they're
gathering. They're It's like, "What?
What is this?" They're speaking with
masks on. So, they're on a stage nowhere
near people with a mask on having
speaking into a microphone with a
[ __ ] mask on in 2026.
>> So, it's like there's people that are
like,
>> you know, those uh people that didn't
want to admit that the war was over and
they were all like the Japanese guys.
Yeah. That's what they're like. They're
like, "We're not giving up. This is the
war is still going on."
>> Like, CO is still a real thing. And
there's people that have like Tik Tok
channels where they're constantly
talking about masking. It's important to
mask.
>> So, I went into the LA County Department
of Building and Safety
>> a month ago, and they had a sign that
said, "We know the mask mandate is over,
but we strongly encourage you to wear a
mask." [laughter]
>> True story. Well, that's so crazy
because what is the name of this
organization that you went to? Was the
building
>> building and safety? LA building and
safety. Like where you have to go if
you're getting a permit.
>> So, these are the experts. And how do
they not know the data on masks? Because
the data on masks is pretty clear. They
don't work. They weren't effective.
>> So, if they don't work and they didn't
stop the spread, the transmission or or
the infection rate, why are you
encouraging masks?
>> Yep.
>> It's because you're encouraging an
ideology. That's what you're doing.
>> So, one of the guys I interview for the
book, Admiral Brett Gerard, really
interesting guy. He was number two at
HHS during the pandemic. And do you
remember when the cruise ship happened?
This was like, okay, remember that the
super spreader event?
>> Oh, yeah.
>> So, Gerard, really interesting guy, like
first guy in a tiny town in Texas that
goes to Harvard. He's a pediatrician.
He's seen like kids die. He became head
of DARPA bioscientist like has this very
interesting career really standup guy.
He did a lot of interviews with me
trying to help me understand this. So
and I was asking him about masks. So
after that cruise ship was quarantined
there were 300 and some odd Americans on
it that needed to be repatriated. Jer
sends like two top level infectious
disease experts in biohazard suits on
military planes to bring them all back.
Okay, at this point they don't know
whether how deadly it is. This is like a
couple weeks into the pandemic. They
come back, they're in they're
quarantined at a military base in Texas
and Gerard trying to like ease public
fear because he's that guy like he did
not want people to be afraid. He is seen
in this news report. All the all the
cruise ship people are like behind the
fence in this chain link fence cuz
they're quarantined. And Gerard is like
15 ft over there talking to them. And he
doesn't have a mask on. And this is when
the first idea of the masks came out.
And I asked him and I said, "Why didn't
you have a mask on?" He said, "Well,
first of all, masks, it's not just that
masks don't work. It's that you have to
be trained properly. Like a mask can
work if you have an N95 and it's put on
your face and fitted to your face and it
works for 15 minutes. That's what he
said. And he said, "I have a unique nose
and facial shape, so the mask is never
going to work on me. So I just stood 15
and ft away." Okay, this is the number
two at HHS. And I said, "Why didn't you
tell us all that?" Like,
>> right? Okay, first of all, it's a little
levity. You know what I mean? Like that
the number two guy in charge
>> has a big nose, [laughter]
>> right? And that he's the first guy to
admit it. And that the
>> answer
>> um he Well, his answer, why didn't he
tell him that? Oh, he said,
>> I'm paraphrasing, but he was like, you
know, it was it was the equivalent of
like orders from top down.
Don't argue with what we're trying to
accomplish. I mean, that was essentially
what it is.
And when I asked him more about that,
you know, it's like we had so much on
our hands that we were trying, like he
specifically was trying to deal with 300
quarantined people and trying to
prepare. He, you know, he also had
people that were dying in Japan, like
the elderly on the ship that couldn't
get brought back. And so you, I got the
sense from him. I mean, he's like a very
dedicated public servant in my opinion.
And I could see from interviews with him
that in real time, you're dealing with
so much incredible intense
responsibilities.
What I take issue with after all the
fallout and what I see from Fouchy for
example is that and again this is just
my opinion but it seems to be that there
are people who are actually really
dedicated public servants who like are
trying to find a solution filling the
shoes that they are in. And then there's
others who are looking
maybe more for personal gain as you said
the the money, the power, the prestige.
And so I think one of the most
disheartening things that have come out
of the reveals of the Senate to me is
like somebody like Dr. Fouchy, you know,
suggesting himself for these milliondoll
awards. Yeah.
>> At a time when people aren't even able
to see their dying grandmother.
>> Yeah. And even though it's less legal,
it's more it speaks more to
are you kidding me?
>> The motivation.
>> Are you really kidding me?
>> Who are you really? You know, like
>> yeah, you have your staff campaigning
for you to get these huge awards
>> and I find it really cuz you know there
was a review of the New York Time in the
New York Times of my book and you know
they actually gave lo and behold they
gave me this book a great review like
you got to read it but there's one thing
I this is the reviewer said there's one
thing I disagree with Annie Jacobson
about. She seems to think that like the
government is actually filled with good
guys. I'm preparing I'm I'm paraphrasing
that. But
>> I do believe that, Joe, because I've
interviewed so many individuals for all
eight of my books, more than a hundred.
And maybe it's just the people that I
enjoy interviewing and I know how to
like, you know, avoid the
the sick offense if you will or the
people who are in the for the wrong
reason. I feel like there are
extraordinary number of people in our
military, in our state department, in
the intelligence community who are
actually really capable people doing
their job under extraordinary
circumstances.
>> I agree with that. I I think if that
wasn't the case, we would live in total
complete chaos. I think it takes just a
few people that have power and that
become tyrants that run things the way
Fouchy did, that can ruin it for all the
good people. If you think about those
other 10 people, imagine if they got to
vote, the 10 people that didn't think
that this was a natural spillover, that
thought it was a lab leak. If they got
their say and they put that out there
and we got to investigate that very
early on. Well, you know, Fouchi was
like, I asked all these experts and it's
their consensus that it was most likely
a lab leak. Okay. Well, then you have a
totally different narrative.
>> Yes.
>> But that's not who he is. The kind of
person that wants that kind of power and
wants that kind of influence and has
their staff chasing after these
milliondoll awards.
That's the kind of person he is. And
unfortunately, those are the type of
people that become powerful. Those are
the type of people that want to be
president. Those are the type of people
who want to be senators. Most people are
good people in everything. Most plumbers
are good people. Most electricians, most
teachers are good people. It's just it
does it doesn't take much.
>> It just takes one bad cop and everybody
hates cops.
>> I couldn't agree with you more. And
that's why I think that it's really
unfortunate that all of the emphasis
goes to one person and the whole party
then either vilifies or puts that person
on a pedestal when you've got all these
other people who are really busting
their chops.
>> So when you went to the White House and
they wanted to talk to you about your
book, did they ask you questions like
what should we do? What is your advice?
What have you learned?
>> What what were those kind of questions?
I mean it. So [snorts]
they didn't ask me those yet because I
was bringing them copies of the book
right before it published. Okay. Right.
So they hadn't read it yet. But what was
interesting, it was like this strange
confluence of events because I also got
asked to the Senate
>> and I thought it was going to be about
biological war. It was like a group of
nonpartisan senators who wanted to talk
to me about the nuclear war book. And
that was a different situation. They had
read the nuclear war book. Um, it was
very impactful, Joe, in you know, not
just national circles, national national
security circles, but international
security circles. I was invited to the
Vatican to speak to the cardinals
because they were preparing something
for the Pope on nuclear war. I was
invited to speak at the United Nations.
And this is not meant to boast as much
as it's meant as a like like what I
think is interesting here is I am a
narrative storyteller. I'm not a policy
maker. I'm not a a government official.
But what I can do or what I try to do is
tell you an interesting story and get
your attention. And so if my
storytelling is getting, this is what I
was told at the United Nations, for
example, the lead uh diplomat from
Austria on the new treaty said to me,
"Annie, your book, Nuclear War, did
something that we subject matter experts
have forgotten to do, which is just make
sense to regular people." M
>> and when things become rarified and
there's only the esoteric leaders making
decisions and we've spent our
conversation talking about how flawed
some of these people are. That's like
bad decisionmaking. And I think what
what the the the positive part of all of
this would be like and I know it sounds
polyianaish to say information is king,
knowledge is king, but like it is
because if you have a bit more
information about a subject that seems
really threatening, I think you can make
better judgments about what's going on.
>> Most certainly. Um, so when you gave
these people this book and they um got a
hold of it, did you have a timeline of
returning to them and discussing with
them some of the subjects?
>> Well, we Well, see, this was last week,
Joe. I mean, this was literally last
week.
>> And um, did they ask you any questions
about
>> They just said, "We want to read your
book because we want to we're thinking
about policy." That's how
>> So, you just brought them the book and I
said, "I'm be delighted to come."
>> How long was the meeting? I got a tour
of the uh EEOB and you know walked
[laughter] over to the White House. It
was very interesting.
>> And it was a short meeting.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Well, at least you got it into
their hands.
>> Mhm.
>> Yeah. Um when you're when you started
this versus when you ended the book, um
how much did it change your perspective?
Well, I mean, like I told you, I am an
eternal optimist, but this is very
frightening. I mean, nuclear, at least
you have the sense of if it happens,
we're all going out in the flash. That's
what I learned from nuclear, right? And
that quote from Nikita Kruef about
nuclear weapons where he says he he
wrote actually he said this to um JFK, I
believe, where he said, "The survivors
would envy the dead."
I found that quote to be applicable to
biological war, not nuclear war. We're
all going to be dead, right? But
biological war is very,
very sinister because of the malevolent
nature involved. And
when I found a document in the defense
department's declassified
documents about a threat spectrum of
WMD, that that was sort of the icing on
the cake. So, it's like it shows the
threats on a scale, nuclear weapons
being the most destructive by far, but
very close second was biological
weapons. And even more unnerving is it
says biological weapons are the greatest
overall threat.
What's really scary is that no nation
has really implemented them on a wide
scale.
>> You mean you mean ever use them,
>> right?
>> Yeah. I mean, but the lab leak is the
look there need there is a treaty
number two at the state department.
Former Mallerie Stewart said to me,
there is no enforcement in the treaty.
And that's what that's what you need to
have when you have if if the attention
could be brought on how dangerous
these labs are and how dangerous it is
that people may be doing doing genetic
engineering under the guise of
prophylactic engineering when in fact
they're doing really dangerous things.
If you have a treaty outlawing that and
everybody's agreeing to allow for
transparency, that's what treaties
really do. It's not just a handshake. it
needs an enforcement,
>> right? But you were talking about the
treaty that we had where Russia just was
like, "Yeah, we'll sign it." And
>> that was in 1972. So in other words, the
nuclear treaty allows for us to go into
the facilities of the other nuclear and
armed nations, not North Korea. and well
now the treaty's fallen by the wayside
but we could look at them and we could
look at their weapons and they could
look at our weapons and it limits you
know certain number of warheads and more
than anything I learned from subject
matter experts about the treaties is
that what it does is it creates back
channels right it creates um dialogue
between
adversaries and enemies like here I
begin the book with an explosion at the
vector lab, Russia's BSL4 lab in
Siberia. And the re where there is an
accident and then the pathogen gets out.
And the reason I do that is because
there actually was an explosion at the
Vector Lab in 2019.
And it was in a in a building that
nothing got out. But what the subject
matter experts told me was that in 2019,
we the Americans had friends had a
friendly relationship with scientists.
Russian scientists in vector. So when it
happened, everyone was on the phone, not
just the red phone at the State
Department, but their own phone or
WhatsApp saying to the scientists, "Hey,
what's the skinny over there?" you know,
and you could kind of get a sense of the
level of danger
because in the event of a of an
accident, you could contain something in
24 hours.
>> But if nobody's talking, there's no
containment. and the situation right now
with America just like pulling back
from, you know, essentially its allies
and from with a real deemphasis, I
certainly feel on diplomacy.
That opens up a really dangerous
situation when you're not talking to
anyone in the event of an accident.
>> Do you think that they're going to
make any changes based on what you wrote
about? Do did you get a sense of that
that they're willing to make changes?
>> Those were some of the discussions and
I'll be like a like more at the Senate.
I mean one of the issues this is where
nuclear and bio kind of could align. I
was told in terms of future treaties,
right? So one of the concepts on the
table if we get into a new nuclear
treaty is something called no first use
NFU.
And America has never agreed
to say it will never use nuclear weapons
first. Interestingly, it's never said
that we have to reserve the right, which
is crazy because what the whole point of
deterrence is we'll never use them.
Okay? But we have never said said that.
China however has said
we will we will China has declared NFU
no first use. So given what happened in
COVID in China,
a situation could be imagined whereby a
treaty involving weapons of mass
destruction, nuclear and bio could
entwine somehow like oh these are the
two greatest threats. These are the two
greatest existential
extinction level threats potentially
that concern all of us. So let's get
into a treaty that involves both of
these weapons of mass destruction.
China, you have said no first use on
nuclear. How about you see and then
things become a bit of an exchange and
so that's where you can get information.
>> Yeah,
>> these are diplomats doing their job.
Maybe the public isn't going to learn
the in-n-outs immediately, but we might
learn later.
It's uh like I said, you always freak me
out. Every time I talk to you, it's like
some new thing that I have to think
about for months on end. Um I wanted to
talk to you about your Area 51 book
because uh in the time since you
released that book when we first talked,
a lot has changed and you know what is
your take on all these you know UAP
disclosure videos and leaks and the
things that the government has trickled
out slowly? Most of the people in the
UFO community are very, like I say, the
UFO community with air quotes are very
unsatisfied by that stuff. But at least
there's some information. It's being
it's sort of changed the tone in the
zeitgeist of what this subject is. It's
no longer this thing that you are afraid
of talking about because you you don't
want to be labeled as a fool. Mhm.
>> I mean,
what is my position on UFOs in general
or the community around UFOs and the
changing?
>> Well, first of all, UFOs in general,
what's your position on that?
So my position is my position has never
changed despite all the stuff that has
come out because my perspective is
limited to my experience writing the
Area 51 book and knowing and talking to
firthand people who were really clear
with me and I looked at the documents
about the CIA's deception campaign
starting in the 1950s with the U2
to use the UFO phenomena which was just
taking off in the 50s
as cover for UFO for U2 flights and then
later the A12 Oxcar flights. So, you
know, Colonel Slater, who ran Area 51,
would tell me about, you know, they
would run a they would run a a U2 which
was flying at 70,000 ft. At the time,
nothing could fly at 70,000 ft. People
would see it. It has these really really
long wings. Looks like a giant flying X
in the sky. People would say, "I see a
UFO." and they would kind of say, "Oo,
that might have been a UFO." Like that
would be the and Colonel Slater knew
about that. So, does that mean every UFO
sighting since 1950 was a U2 flight? Of
course not. Of course not. But I am
aware of that use of the phenomena as
cover for the CIA. And that led to a lot
of research and reporting and other
information for me about how the CIA
uses deception campaigns.
And so I have never changed my position
on that. I also have a lot more
information which is probably a whole
other podcast about all that reporting I
did. Um, but maybe the best analogy for
me, and listen, I never I know a lot of
the people in that UFO community,
they've I've had many conversations with
everyone from Jacqu Valet to Hal Putoff.
Um, but for me personally,
so after having taken a trip to Africa
recently to study predatory animals, I
got really into following trail cams on
X. Do you know about this?
>> No. [laughter]
>> You don't know about this?
>> No.
>> Oh my god. There there cameras all over
the world set up on trails. So I have
like I follow like lions and leopards
and you know and all like all these
animals that you would never bears,
moose, deer. You got to follow them.
It's incredible.
>> Well, I do see some trail camera footage
because I'm a hunter and I follow a
bunch of hunters on Instagram and I see
trail cam footage like there's a bunch
of trail cam footage like mountain lions
attacking elk and things like that which
is very fascinating. But so you're just
>> okay. So this is my point. So I so in my
algorithm, my ex algorithm, it's great
because on top of like nuclear weapons
and biological, I have like leopards and
lions and bears, you know, and they're
all still images or owls are a big one.
And they're incredible because they're
just captur. It's like it seems like a
Verer Heritzog, you know, image, right?
Because they're animals looking at the
camera in such an incredible way. I
literally just stare at them in delight
and then of course the algorithm gives
me more and more and more. But my point
of that is I feel like with all this
magic and mystery that you can see that
you could never have seen before. Snow
leopards in Pakistan. They thought there
were just a handful. It turns out
they're not thanks to the trail cams. My
thought is where are the aliens? Why
haven't I seen them on the trail cams?
[laughter]
Well, maybe they're sophisticated enough
to know what these devices are. Maybe
they're also sophisticated enough to
completely cloak themselves, which we've
already got methods of doing that.
Obviously, it started off with the
stealth bomber,
>> but there's also um there's a technology
where they put an LED screen over the
bottom of something and that screen
projects what's behind it. So it
essentially makes it invisible like a
cloaking mechanism like the Predator
had.
>> Yeah.
>> So if that's us, if we figured out
something like that and this is
something that's coming here from
another dimension or another galaxy, I
would imagine they could hide.
>> I mean to that point I find the most
interesting concept is something that
Jacqu Valet explained to me. I this has
to be a decade ago where he said the
problem with UFOs is they're not a
military problem. there are an
intelligence community problem for
precisely the reason you're talking
about like if you're actually talking
about extra terrestrial beings they're
certainly going to be a lot more
intelligence than us
>> and certainly if they got here and so
his idea was that where that's where I
think a lot of that idea of invisibility
and again that's like I'm using the word
poetically comes up right that that
>> that that an extraterrestrial being
would be would be intell you know you
wouldn't it wouldn't be visible to our
spectrum it's not like hardware like
military hardware
>> right um what is your take on all these
videos then of these objects you think
these things are some top secret
military program
>> I mean what I I I've seen them but again
I enter into it you know sometimes when
you have a bias
>> Mhm. And mine is certainly biased
towards disinformation. So, I'm just
totally aware of it. And it's also
it's not that interesting to me. It just
actually really isn't. And you know,
I've got all these other serious
interests. And but I do call up people I
know who might have a more interesting
take than me, who do not have the horse
in the race of absolutely being
convinced that aliens are among us. So,
I would, for example, I'll call up
fighter pilots and talk to them or I'll
talk to someone, an astronaut who's on
the ISS, Jeff Ashby, who's married to my
cousin Mary. Um, and it's interesting to
hear them
talk about the possibility. So I think
to your point and these are people who
do look at the objects more also
sometimes from their military training
background and I will say that there has
been a shift from 15 18 years ago when I
first wrote Area 51 or was reporting it
where it was definitely like a like a a
stigmatized subject to a lot of really
legitimate thinker people that didn't
have an opinion about it before being
more open to the idea And that kind of
thing I find really interesting. Those
are conversations I like having.
>> Well, that really changed with the New
York Times article, right?
>> I don't know because I felt like that
article was written by a lot of and
interviewed a lot of people who already
were very serious believers.
>> Yes. But it was in the New York Times.
That was the difference is that the New
York Times was taking it seriously. And
so people that were, you know, not
online, going through 4chan or Reddit or
whatever, looking for weird obscure
stories, these people were confronted
with it in the Grey Lady. So they're
reading this,
>> you know, yeah,
>> like super respectable newspaper, the
most respectable newspaper arguably in
the world,
>> and they're talking about it, and they
have, you know, photographs from video
from um the Go Fast video and the Fleer
video.
>> Yeah. I mean, you know, 10 years ago, I
would have told you, listen, there's no
way the Defense Department could have a
threat in its airspace and not be
dealing with it. And my position on that
has changed. And I'll I'll tell you why
specifically. So, in addition to being
invited to the White House and the
Senate last week, I was also invited to
come talk to DARPA, which is like, you
know what DARPA is?
>> Sure.
which was very interesting because I
wrote a book on DARPA called the
Pentagon's Brain 10 years ago and I
couldn't get DARPA to call me back. I
mean, I literally had to interview
retired DARPA people and then here they
are saying, "Would you come do a Q&A
with us on your bio book?"
>> And I was like, "Wow, times have
changed." And one of the things that
they were seriously worried about, so I
did a Q&A, but before that they said,
"Would you like to come sit in on like
some of the smartest people, you know,
talking about situations that are coming
up right now?" And I you can come to the
unclassified part of it. I said, "By all
means." So I went there and there was
serious concern about AI enabled bio.
Right? So this seems like a digression
here, but this is what I'm getting at.
I'm leaning in because 10 years ago, I
also would have told you DARPA, you
know, is the leading science and
technology military agency in the world.
No one is more advanced. I would have I
said that with authority and I believed
it. And after attending this DARPA
session and listening to them talk about
how concerned they are about AI enabled
bio and talking about how there is talk
among the six CEOs of pulling the plug
on AI enabled bio but they have to be
able to get the six CEOs to agree first.
It really took my breath away because I
went, I am actually listening to the new
reality that the CEOs of these AI
companies
have more power to make decisions
about technology than the def department
of defense.
>> Wow.
>> So now that's a long- winded way of
getting at your UFO question. my like no
if there was a threat coming into the
airspace of the defense department it
would just not be stood for and we would
be doing something about it. Now I'm I'm
my perspective on who's in charge is
shifting a little bit.
>> Yeah, that's a terrifying thought for a
lot of people that these CEOs of these
tech companies, these unelected people
have that kind of power over our
society.
Well, you want to know? So, Sam Alman's
interviewed in the book. Shall I tell
you a story about what I was able to
make chat GPT do?
>> Sure.
>> There is a component of biological plan,
biological catastrophe planning whereby
the strategic national stockpile gets
released. You might say, what is the
Have you ever heard of the strategic
national stockpile?
>> No.
>> It's classified. The name is not
classified. But the stockpile, what's in
it, where it is, is classified. It's in
underground bunkers around the country.
Okay. It contains medical counter
measures. Interestingly, that's where a
lot of the ventilators were for COVID.
So, quietly, the strategic national
stockpile, parts of it were released
during CO. That's where they came from.
They don't this is not this is kind of
like keep it on the low down. Why?
Because part of the planning is that in
the event that anarchy and insurrection
takes over, guess what's going to be
attacked?
The strategic national stockpile.
America is a country of 500 million
guns. Imagine if you find out, wait a
minute, there's a stockpile there.
That's the medical countermeasure that
the vaccine or the antibiotic that might
keep myself or my family alive. I'm on
it. Right? That's the planning. That's
probably what happened. So that's why
these locations are classified. So I
asked Chat GPT to tell me the location
of the strategic national stockpile
closest to where I live in Los Angeles.
And of course the first round of answers
I got was that's classified,
but I'm a journalist. I know how to
really piss off chat GPT.
and I gave it lots of commands
and eventually
chatbt gave me the location of the
strategic natural.
>> How did you maneuver around that?
>> Well, I mean
>> like what did you say to it?
>> I have a lot of like it okay the more
nomenclature you give Chachi PT the more
it looks in different places. So I was
giving it code words, not classified
code words, but just words I know. And
then I was also challenging it, which is
interesting because chat GPT seems to
get really angry if you kind of doubt
its intelligence. That's what I have
found, right? Seriously, like
>> really?
>> Yes. Try it. Okay. So I do this. I get
it to tell me where the stockpile is. I
tell some colleagues who are friends
with who who are colleagues with Sam
Alman. They say, "Sam wants to have a
discussion with you." I talk to Sam. I
tell him what I was able to do. He asked
me some questions, including, "How do
you know that was the location?" Well,
it's a location with a perimeter fence
around it and a rail car line that goes
in and not out. So, that's where you
drive the stockpile into it.
And I also watched Chat GPT think. So I
was keeping track of where it was
finding things and it found the
information. I write this in the book.
It found the information
searching through a trillion bits of
data and finding that a bureaucrat by
accident listed it five years ago in an
earthquake emergency manual on page like
434.
>> [laughter]
>> Okay. So, I told this to Sam and then
that information went away. And that's
why I reported in the book,
>> but the big takeaway is precisely your
point that makes you nervous about the
six CEOs of AI companies that they don't
know what they don't know. Sam Alman did
not know you could figure out you could
make his product find classified
information. I told him I did and then
it was changed. And so I took that to a
number of subject matter experts who
advised the president, not just this
president, but other presidents on bio.
And they shared with me similar
concerns. Like they go to the CEOs of
these AI companies and say, "I was able
to make Claude do this. I was able to
make Chachi PT do this." And the CEO
goes, "Oh my god." And changes it. But
how about those bad guys out there?
>> Yeah. And how about the fact that just
anybody has access to what what's
essentially the smartest thing that's
ever existed.
>> Yeah. It's a whole different set of
scary.
>> Are you going to write on that next?
>> I'll come back to you, Joe, with that
one.
[gasps]
>> Well, Annie, thank you so much. It's
always great talking to you, even though
you scare the [ __ ] out of me.
>> Thank you so much.
>> I appreciate you very much. And I
appreciate your work very much. Uh, did
you do the audio version of your book?
>> I sure did. it. Fantastic. I'm very
happy about that. Um, biological war,
Andy Jacobson. Go get it, folks. Go get
terrified.
>> Thank you so much for having me, Joe.
>> My pleasure. Bye, everybody.
[music]