Does anyone else wonder, are there untold stories about Ukraine that we just don’t know about?
Consider how Ukraine was in the news, before the war :
1. Trump was impeached over a phone call with the president of Ukraine.
2. Hunter Biden made tons of money from a Ukrainian energy company.
3. Joe Biden, as VP, apparently persuaded Ukrainian officials not to investigate business dealings his son was involved in.
It makes me wonder, what do we not know, about Ukraine, and are there things which might tie these events together? Was Trump impeached due to getting too close to revealing certain things that the powers that be want to remain hidden? Since Hunter has no experience in the energy industries, why was he being paid by a Ukrainian company? For what exactly was he being paid? What did Joe Biden fear being revealed with an investigation of his son by Ukrainian officials?
Just some thoughts, that there could be untold stories which are driving events.
We know the Ukrainians want to get rid of corruption, that’s why they elected Zelensky in 2019. We know that there is oil and other minerals in the Donbas so people who believe this is about NATO are pretty naive. Putin wants the resources period.
All good points. Putin definitely worked with the Democrats on the smear campaign against Trump, with the media’s help. Putin is grateful to have Biden.
So Zelenski wants to join EU/NATO as that will improve sale of Ukrainian agriculture and possibly Ukrainian energy (lots of Nuke Power). He needs US support. Through Burisma and other conduits he BRIBES a Democratic candidate and sets up the Republican candidate for a fall. Money flows to congress critters and MSM pundits to push th narrative. Bingo He get’s an invite to join the EU trade and possibly a NATO slot. And Putin thinks F that and here we are. Prove me wrong.
Bioweapons Expert Speaks Out About US Biolabs in Ukraine, can you blame Russia for trying to get rid of them?
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
Fact Checked
April 09, 2022
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
According to bioweapons expert Francis Boyle, Russia’s accusation that Ukraine is conducting U.S.-funded bioweapons research appears to be accurate
If true, everyone involved is subject to life in prison under the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989
According to Boyle, the U.S. government and Pentagon have had a “comprehensive policy” to “surround Russia with biological warfare laboratories” and “preposition biological weapons” there for use against them
The problem with trying to make a distinction between “biodefense” and “biowarfare” is that, basically, there is none. No biodefense research is purely defensive, because to do biodefense work, you’re automatically engaged in the creation of biological weapons, and all dual use research can be used for military purposes. SARS-CoV-2 may be the result of such dual use research
Boyle believes we can hold the culprits behind the SARS-CoV-2 bioweapon accountable by asking local prosecutors to convene a grand jury to seek the indictment of those responsible for the pandemic for murder and conspiracy to commit murder
In the video above, “InfoWars” host Owen Shroyer interviews Francis Boyle, Ph.D., a Harvard educated lawyer and bioweapons expert with a Ph.D. in political science, about the biolabs in Ukraine, which Russia claims are engaged in U.S.-funded bioweapons research.
For decades, Boyle has advocated against the development and use of bioweapons. In fact, he was the one who called for biowarfare legislation at the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972. He then went on to draft the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act, which was passed unanimously by both houses of Congress and signed into law by then-president George Bush Sr. in May 1989.
While the U.S. has vehemently denied Russia’s accusations, Boyle says that based on what he’s discovered so far, the labs in Ukraine are all conducting biological warfare research — including ethnic-specific biological weapons — at the behest of the U.S. Pentagon, just as Russian authorities are claiming.
“The Pentagon does not do missionary work,” he says. “They kill people, and that’s why they are there.” He also points out that everyone involved is subject to life in prison under the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, which explains the mad scramble to project these labs as something other than what they are.
Ever-Changing Narrative Reveals the Lies
As noted by Shroyer, the official narrative surrounding the Ukraine biolabs has undergone multiple iterations over the past few weeks. It began with a flat denial of there being U.S. biolabs in Ukraine.
But within days, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland blew a hole in that denial by admitting before Congress that “biological research laboratories” in Ukraine have been funded and operated under the direction of the U.S., and that she was “very concerned” about the contents of those labs being used as bioweapons by the Russians.
Despite Nuland’s concern about the pathogens being used in warfare, the Western media have tried to claim the labs were set up to destroy bioweapons from the Soviet era, or to “secure” old Soviet bioweapons, or that they’re diagnostic labs, “health labs,” biodefense laboratories, or that they’re used for vaccine development. The story changes depending on who’s telling it.
Boyle doesn’t buy any of it. According to Boyle, the U.S. government and Pentagon have had a “comprehensive policy” in place for quite some time to “surround Russia with biological warfare laboratories” and “preposition biological weapons” there for use against Russia. The U.S. also has these kinds of labs in Central Asia, he says.
No Such Thing as ‘Biodefense’
One of the latest explanations from a U.S. State Department spokesperson is that Ukraine has “biodefense” laboratories, which are “not biological weapons facilities.”1 The problem with making a distinction between “biodefense” and “biowarfare” is that, basically, there is none.
No biodefense research is purely defensive, because to do biodefense work, you’re automatically engaged in the creation of biological weapons.
All dual use research can be used for military purposes, and often is. As explained by Boyle, the idea behind “biodefense” research is that there might be a natural pathogen out there that can cause a pandemic, or someone might release an engineered biological weapon, that we need to prepare a cure for.
But to create the cure — the vaccine — they must first create that imagined threat, be it a souped-up natural pathogen through gain-of-function or a synthetic bioweapon. So, all of this work is “offensive” in that it can be used for military purposes. No biodefense research is purely defensive, because to do biodefense work, you’re automatically engaged in the creation of biological weapons.
So, according to Boyle, the justification that the labs are for biodefense and health purposes is nothing but a façade for the fact that they’re conducting offensive biological warfare research with genetic research, gain-of-function and synthetic biology.
What Drives the Biowarfare Industry?
When asked what the motive behind this kind of research might be, Boyle highlights two potential reasons. First, he says, there’s a global “Nazi cult” that simply does not want to stop. They want to be able to rid the world of certain ethnic groups, hence the focus on DNA-based ethnic-specific weapons.
He points out that the United States is the only country in the world that has not abided by the law to get rid of all its biological weapons. Instead, we’ve been making more, under the guise of biodefense research.
Not just Hunter, but Pelosi’s son, Kerry’s son, Romney’s son, all that brain power and business acumen, yet Ukraine remains dirt poor.
Hard to fathom what is wrong with that resource rich country
I have to agree with you. There is a lot we do not know about the Ukraine situation and Biden’s involvement. Of course the media has no interest in finding out if Biden is involved in anyway.
-------------------------------
Uh, yeah. Ahem:
"The problem with trying to make a distinction between “biodefense” and “biowarfare” is that, basically, there is none. No biodefense research is purely defensive, because to do biodefense work, you’re automatically engaged in the creation of biological weapons, and all dual use research can be used for military purposes. SARS-CoV-2 may be the result of such dual use research.Bioweapons Expert Speaks Out About US Biolabs in Ukraine
It’s common knowledge that Trump was impeached for trying to turn over the rocks our, now, Ukrainian hero partners and DC oligarchs were hiding under. You can not come to this site and make the point that Russia has any legitimate security interests anywhere in world, especially on their border 300 miles from Moscow. Only a Putin stooge would even contemplate such heresy.
I am certain that the American Press with carefully investigate your areas of concern. Chuck Todd will devote most of Sunday morning discussing these points.
Seriously, we are on the brink of nuclear war because the press covered up an election stolen by the Biden mafia.
“Was Trump impeached due to getting too close to revealing certain things that the powers that be want to remain hidden?”
Clearly. And the Ukrainian spy dressed up in an American Army uniform, Vindman, ran out of the meeting to let his handlers know that the President was opening up a window on the operation.
If anyone thinks it’s normal for a foreign born guy to end up in the White House with the kind of clearances that requires is unaware of the way our system works. Extraordinary is a small word for it.
So why was he there? Because he was put there...to keep an eye on Don Trump.
“Since Hunter has no experience in the energy industries, why was he being paid by a Ukrainian company? For what exactly was he being paid? What did Joe Biden fear being revealed with an investigation of his son by Ukrainian officials?”
After reading articles about bioweapons/research labs in Ukraine, I think I have seen the basic set up:
1. US Department of Defense funded a Ukrainian company supposedly to research control of nasty plant diseases and such (because DoD normally funds agriculture...), through a company controlled by Hunter Biden. (This is why Hunter’s laptop has DoD communications data on it). Whether any research was actually done, or if this was just a scam created by Joe remains to be discovered.
2. Just by chance, the same Ukrainian oligarch who controlled the Lab Research company also controlled Burisma.
3. Said oligarch appreciated his working relationship with the Biden Family SO MUCH that he installed Hunter as a Burisma Board Member. Despite Hunter having no qualifications, experience, or expertise, performing no work, and never going to Ukraine, the oligarch was happy to pay Hunter vast sums for doing nothing.
4. Conclusion: Absent an alternative explanation, Hunter’s Burisma Board gig was the conduit for paying kickbacks to the Bidens for the DoD funding.
Funny how our brilliant Congressional and DoJ investigators can’t connect dots. D’oh!
Insightful post.
Speaks to why this article was an interesting find for me and why I posted it for discussion.
We have a India/British AEP member basing an entire op-ed for the Wall Street Journal around what supposedly is his condensation of a Hoover Institute Russian historian’s take on Putin/Ukraine. AND it is being re-printed in a US - Ukraine cooperative council newsletter site.
First of all the insight on anything Russian from Service cannot be ignored or pooh-poohed despite any aversion to a second hand disparagement of Trump. Pipes and Service are the truth speakers over the last 45 years about the Soviets and Russians.
Secondly, this dangling of NATO to the very peoples we knew Russia was fearful of involvement is a recurring theme. It culminated under Slow-Joe but its been allowed to evolve for 25 years and it must be addressed as a mistake by the West in general.
We have in recent days Arch-Bishop Carlo Maria Viganò citing the same linch-pin.
As I have said before, Poster Oblomov said it best:
The Ukraine war is a proxy war between two factions of the left. The old anti-authoritarian left has been marginalized, and they aren’t one of the warring factions. It’s between the nationalist neo-Stalinist left and transnational corporatist progressivism.
The most useful takeaway for me in the article is how Service believes that instead of Putin longing for Soviet communist glory, Putin hated the communist detour of what would have been a greater imperial Russia in Putin’s alternate history.
One time if I hadn’t been inclined to have a cup of coffee first, I could have been right where Russian agents assassinated an anti-Russian MP. We passed kitty-corner to where the body lay.