A new U.S. intelligence investigation has reportedly been launched into more than 120 overseas biological laboratories linked to U.S. taxpayer funding, including approximately 40 facilities in Ukraine, according to discussion presented on Redacted News featuring Clayton and Natali Morris with biological warfare epidemiologist Dr. Meryl Nass.
By elocal
The investigation was described as being led through the office of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and is reportedly aimed at identifying:
- Locations of overseas laboratories
- Pathogens being housed
- Research currently being conducted
- Potential gain-of-function activity
According to the discussion, this follows earlier controversy surrounding claims about U.S.-supported biological research facilities in Ukraine.
Previous Statements Revisited
The discussion referenced comments made during earlier U.S. Senate hearings in which former U.S. official Victoria Nuland acknowledged the existence of biological research facilities in Ukraine while rejecting allegations that they were associated with offensive biological weapons programs.
During those exchanges, concerns were raised regarding preventing sensitive research materials from falling into Russian control during the conflict.
The topic has remained contentious since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, with competing claims over the purpose and activities of these facilities.
Historical Context Raised
Dr. Meryl Nass discussed historical biological weapons research dating back to World War II and the Cold War period, noting that numerous nations had explored biological agents, treatments and vaccines over previous decades.
She stated:
"At least since World War II, minimum ten countries and probably many more have studied biological weapons agents as well as treatments and vaccines for them."
According to Nass, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, efforts were made to redirect former biological researchers into civilian activities. She questioned whether some of those initiatives may have unintentionally evolved into more extensive overseas laboratory programs.
Oversight Questions
One of the central themes of the discussion involved oversight and transparency.
Nass argued that laboratories operating outside the United States may face less direct scrutiny from Congress and freedom-of-information processes.
She stated:
"If the United States for example did it in another country though that lab information could never necessarily be obtained by Congress."
The discussion also highlighted claims involving facilities in Georgia and Bulgaria, where allegations have circulated previously regarding research activity and health concerns. Specific allegations discussed during the program were not independently verified in the transcript.
Questions Around Enforcement
The discussion also focused on the Biological Weapons Convention.
Nass noted that while approximately 185 nations have signed and ratified the treaty, she argued that enforcement mechanisms remain limited.
According to her:
"That international treaty has no mechanism for enforcement."
She argued that while biological weapons development is prohibited under international agreements, verification remains difficult.
Speculation and Allegations
During portions of the interview, speculation was raised regarding:
- COVID origins
- Vaccine development
- Anthrax research
- Animal pathogen programs
- Intelligence agency involvement
Many of these topics were presented by participants as questions or hypotheses rather than established findings, and multiple claims discussed remain disputed or unverified.
Dr. Nass specifically stated that some of her remarks represented "informed speculation."
Looking Ahead
The reported intelligence investigation may provide further clarity regarding the scope and activities of overseas biological facilities if findings become public.
For now, the discussion appears to raise broader questions surrounding oversight, transparency and the balance between biological defense research and public accountability.
As additional information emerges from the investigation, attention is likely to focus on whether greater detail regarding funding, activities and operational controls is released.