More on the labs, as this is shaping up to be at the core of what is happening.
Long read, by necessity.
First, a few observations.
1) BioClandestine, the person who ‘broke the story’ on Twitter (several investigative journalists have been on the biolabs for years now, shout-out to Dilyana Gaytandzhieva), was banned from Twitter within 24 hrs.
This was a completely new topic and charge, which makes that speed very suspicious: why ban an idea if it isn’t true (as they claimed, initially), or if it is harmless (the accusation by itself doesn’t harm, so their excuse to suppress people for making claims on Covid, the jab, therapeutics, etc. [in their narrative, not following the ‘science’ would be deadly] does not apply here!)?
1.a) BioClandestine claims that he and family members who work in the Intelligence world got questioned about this, focus of the questioning was to find out if he had gotten access to classified info, or if he had contact with foreign actors.
Why would such high level agencies be involved if it is yet another wacko tinfoil hat fabrication? And why question specifically on sources and contacts, right off the bat?
Unless, of course…
2) Russia called for a UN Security Council meeting. Why do so, if you don’t have the goods to back up your claims? No actual evidence was presented, but Russia claimed it would present such in the near future.
3) On one hand, you have NATO countries who vehemently deny those accusations, dismiss them out of hand, even. On the other hand, Russia who makes very specific accusations.
Both are involved parties, in this war. If that claim is true, Russia is more than justified to invade and neutralize that threat. If that claim is untrue, Russia [seems to] have no legitimate reason to have invaded Russia.
So we should not accept any claim, pro or con, without proper evidence.
Enter China, India and several other non-EU countries on that UN Security Council meeting: in various shades of trying to remain in the middle/neutral regarding the actual war, they each called for investigations into the alleged bioweapon labs.
That is a major indicator of where the world stands.
4) When Iran engages in nuclear research/technology, sanctions and IAEA audits/controls are put into place to ensure that their use remains strictly ‘peaceful’, including limitations of quantities of fissionable materials. Yet the US denies the same confirmation and assurances now that serious accusations are leveled against labs the US runs.
As to the excuses from the Biden White House: Strictly peaceful research into bioweapons has some important differences from ‘non-peaceful’ uses. This includes quantity of pathogens stored, form into which they are stored, etc.
Yet, at the same time, it is near impossible to do such ‘peaceful research’ without also including research into the weapon side of it, or into elements that can very easily be turned into weapons.
Keep those observations in mind, as we go on a deep dive into time.
________________________________________
A bit of history.
The Russians and Americans have both undertaken research into biological and toxin weapons. Officially, the US only on non-contagious organisms (such as anthrax and tularemia), and only until 1969, while Russia also sought to study and develop the most contagious and lethal bacteria and viruses (plague and smallpox, resp.).
Despite the 1972 convention on such bioweapons, the Russians continued their research, but as they operated ‘under the highest security classification of “Special Importance” (higher than Top Secret), the U.S. intelligence community did not even know it existed until 1989 when a top ranking scientist from the bioweapon program defected to the United Kingdom.’
One of the topics this defector divulged, was on the genetic engineering successes and other advances in Russian microbiology.
Context: on November 16, 1988, Estonia was the first Soviet state to declare state sovereignty from Moscow, setting off a chain reaction. In October 1989, the Berlin Wall fell. And on Dec. 26, 1991, the Soviet Red Flag was lowered from the Kremlin for the last time, to be replaced with the Russian tricolor flag.
It is in this period that these defectors saw their chance (or felt the need to save their hide) to escape and defect. The first, high ranking scientist (defected Oct. 1989) admitted an “extensive genetic engineering program aimed at developing new kinds of biological weapons against which the West would be defenseless.” (For example making one strain of tularemia resistant to all known Western antibiotics.)
Subsequent lower ranking defectors corroborated the first defector’s info. Importantly, they signaled that while Gorbachev had ordered the termination of biological offensive programs in 1990, which Boris Yeltsin had also publically announced, they confirmed that research on new forms of plague had secretly continued.
[Color me skeptical, but definitely in light of the recent news, I don’t think the US fully stopped their research in 1972, either, perhaps keeping it secret from the official government circles, hiding behind ‘need to know’ and euphemisms.]
At the end of 1992, the Deputy Director of Biopreparat defected (meaning the second in command, of one of the main research entities that employed over 30,000 people; Biopreparat was a military program under civilian cover). This provided top level info on just about all aspects of the Russian bioweapon programs and their advancements.
(https://irp.fas.org/threat/cbw/nextgen.pdf)
I believe it is news of what those defectors said, that in part spurred or boosted the Nunn-Lugar efforts that ended in the ‘Cooperative Threat Reduction Program’ (CTR), or the Nunn-Lugar Act. Even though it was first conceived and created in 1986 out of concern of nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands if and when the USSR would break apart, it became a law in 1991 as the USSR was indeed in full collapse.
One Military paper stated:
“The revolution in molecular biology and biotechnology can be considered as a potential Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA). […] Four elements are required for a RMA: technological advancement, incorporation of this new technology into military systems, military operational innovation, and organizational adaptation in a way that fundamentally alters the character and conduct of conflict.”
Interestingly, it admitted:
“The closure of our offensive program has had a serious and limiting effect on our ability to develop medical defensive measures, such as our capability to develop appropriate vaccines, antibiotics, and other treatments.”
This shows that there is basically no difference between a ‘peaceful’ and an ‘offensive’ bioweapons program (!!). Only the intent is different, but that can change from one minute to the next, depending on who is in charge.
“In 1997, the United States Department of Defense released Proliferation: Threat and Response, which identified trends in biological warfare capabilities. These included the increasing use of genetically engineered vectors and the growing understanding of both infectious disease mechanisms and the immune defense system.”
An interesting chapter is the following, indicating that early 2000 the Military was thinking about the threat that biological weapons pose, and the different ways new technology can be used to such ends. Some of those are of interest in light of the current developments. They talk about ‘turning off the immune system’ as the goal of one type of designed disease. (which is exactly what the vaccine does, especially with repeated exposure)
The paper calls for action: “Biological warfare and bioterrorism are multifactorial problems that will require multifactorial solutions. We need our best critical thinkers and biological researchers to solve this constantly evolving problem. Fortunately, the same advances in genomic biotechnologies that can be used to create bioweapons can also be used to set up countermeasures against them.”
Any advance in protection comes with the knowledge to attack, just the same. The paper focused on six main areas where biotechnological research could make significant contributions to peaceful ends:
• Understanding the human genome
• Boosting the immune system
• Understanding viral and bacterial genomes
• Bio-agent detection and identification equipment
• New vaccines
• New antibiotics and antiviral drugs
The paper wrote in it’s conclusion:
“Genetically engineered pathogens constitute the “next generation” of biological warfare agents. Evidence indicates that the Russians have genetically engineered biological warfare agents. Ken Alibek’s [the 3rd, top ranked defector] original debriefings were so shocking that some military and intelligence personnel preferred to believe that he was exaggerating. As his statements about genetic engineering and FSU capabilities began to be substantiated, however, the reality began to sink in.”
I believe that this was the impetus that started top levels of the US to start looking into new virus and pathogen related advancements, laying out a path that follows the weapon path, for higher speed of discovery and higher efficiency of research, even if skirting the laws. Remember that this was also in the wake of 9-11, and any research to halt terrorist advantages would have found funding.
The paper ends ominously:
“There are those who say: “the First World War was chemical; the Second World War was nuclear; and that the Third World War – God forbid – will be biological.””
(the paper in question: ‘Next Generation Bioweapons: The Technology Of Genetic Engineering Applied To Biowarfare And Bioterrorism’, by Michael J. Ainscough, Colonel, USAF; The Counterproliferation Papers Future Warfare Series No. 14)
Another article, from Feb 4, 2002 (NYT), informs us that Bush was requesting big spending to push on bioterrorism, talking about a budget increase from $1.4 billion to $5.9 billion.
“Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, said the huge infusion of federal aid for basic and applied research was likely to be "transforming." "The $1.75 billion request for the National Institutes of Health alone is the biggest single-year request for any discipline or institute in the history of the N.I.H.," Dr. Fauci said. "This is the first time that an extraordinary amount of money is being increased expressly for bioterrorism rather than for the general enhancement of capabilities." But, he added, because of this investment "we may all be healthier."
And
“Dr. Fauci said he was putting the final touches on a strategic plan for spending the new money at his institute, which is scheduled to receive a 61 percent increase. He said he would spend about $441 million of the $1.75 billion budget on basic research, some $592 million on drug and vaccine discovery and development, $194 million on trials of new drugs, and $522 million on new research laboratories at federal, university and industry facilities.”
Tellingly, it also records Fauci as stating this:
“"You need appropriate facilities to work on dangerous microbes that can be used for weapons," Dr. Fauci said. "And we must jump-start our efforts to get new facilities and expertise into existing centers of biological excellence.”
(https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/04/us/nation-challenged-bioterrorism-bush-request-major-increase-bioterror-funds.html)
Is this why Fauci is suddenly hiding?
Consider that when he was testifying before Congress in 2003, in light of the counter-bioterror program ‘BioShield’ his NIH and NIAID was to receive billions in extra funding for, he also stated:
“Because as a matter of fact, as we have discussed before, as you know we feel that deliberately released microbes is just another form of emerging and reemerging disease. Instead of occurring naturally, it is done with malice and deliberately, but the end result can be the same.”
An alarming case of blurring lines and limits…
In light of all this, an August 2005 article stated:
“The agreement, the result of more than a year of negotiations, was announced by Sens. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.) during a visit to the Ukrainian capital, Kiev. The senators credited Ukraine's reformist leaders, ushered into power by last fall's Orange Revolution, with breaking bureaucratic resistance to the pact.”
The goal of that pact was to allow the US to give aid to ‘improve security at facilities where dangerous microbes are kept.’
(Interestingly, that same article relays the story that the Russians created an incident, refusing to let the Senators’ plane leave, demanding to search the plane. What did they get a whiff of, at that early point?)
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2005/08/30/us-to-aid-ukraine-in-countering-bioweapons/72059ed1-90ca-4381-ac6f-10f4e205f09e/)
I am aware that this is nowhere close to a smoking gun, but it paints the context and high level thinking that happened early 2000, paving the way for what we now see unfold.
We know that Fauci pushed for gain of function research, and LIED to CONGRESS (which means, he lied to us all) about it. He managed to do so through contractors.
The same contractors that are running and funding all the other biolabs, away from oversight and reporting requirements. Often hiding behind diplomatic immunity, apparently (which means that some in our government were aware, and were covering the tracks of those involved.)
In 2004, an earlier revolution happened in Ukraine, where Yanukovych, the candidate favored by Putin was defeated in a new election, ordered by the Ukrainian Supreme Court, and that his opponent, Yushenko, was declared the winner. And we know that this was hailed as positive to help Lugar and Obama broker their deal, letting the US in those exact same high level bio labs in Ukraine.
Another in a string of dots.
I don’t think this narrative is off, and that it paints the beginning of the current problem the US finds itself in.
While I don’t have any smoking gun yet (don’t think that such will be left accessible online), it might help others to focus their search, and create a much more solid narrative. Connect the dots.
In summary:
1) A shock revelation of highly advanced bioresearch by the Russians, and that this was ongoing (despite claims by Gorbachov and Yeltsin such research was disbanded).
2) 9.11, and sudden funding for defense against bioterror
3) Lugar and Obama use the Nunn-Lugar act to gain access to Ukraine labs (among others, likely).
4) Fauci gets billions extra funding to look into bioterror.
5) The Army already outlined the new possible ‘Revolution in Military Affairs’, biotech. (With the understanding they had to get going to not miss that bus)
6) Fauci did gain of function research, through contractors. Lied about it.
7) Did such in China, Wuhan, for certain. Similar research elsewhere?
8) COvid-19 breaks out.
9) War in Ukraine breaks out. A ‘grunt with an iPhone’ stumbles across 2 maps that look very similar, and gets immediate pushback, from everywhere…
And that brings us right back to where we are now.
Hopefully with a better understanding of how it got this far.
Great content ... thank you.