Rubio: "Does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons?"
Nuland: "Uh, Ukraine has, uh, bio (pause) logical research facilities which in fact we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to, uh, gain control of, so we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of these research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach."
Florida Senator Marco Rubio, having been presented with that answer from Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, could have asked any of a bevy of obvious follow-up questions:
1) Are there toxic pathogens at these facilities that can be weaponized?
2) How many facilities are there?
3) How long have these facilities been operating?
4) Did the U.S. help fund these facilities? If so, how are they funded?
5) Were any Americans working at these facilities?
6) Do we have similar labs in other European countries? If not, why in Ukraine?
Instead of asking any of these obvious questions screaming to be asked, Rubio interrupted Nuland with:
"I'm sure you're aware that Russian propaganda groups are already putting out there all kinds of information about how they've uncovered a plot by Ukrainians to release biological weapons in the country and, with NATO's coordination. If there's a biological or chemical incident or attack inside of Ukraine, is there any doubt in your mind that 100 percent it would be the Russians that would be behind it?"
That was Rubio's interruption. His questioning had veered off the intended road, so he interrupted with a rhetorical leading question. He took it the whole nine yards by asking for a "100 percent" certainty. Just ridiculous.
Responses
Well, today Mitt Romney called Tulsi Gabbard "treasonous" because Gabbard pointed out that there are 26 U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine, some of which have dangerous pathogens. I guess it doesn't take much to commit treason these days.
Pushback on the biolabs reporting has been interesting. For example, mainstream media has decided that labeling the labs "secret" demonstrates the falsity of the story. The labs aren't technically secret, although one could argue that if 99% of Americans didn't know about them, the labs were effectively if not definitionally "secret."
The 2005 agreement between the U.S. and Ukraine (for the U.S. to provide assistance to safely handle former Soviet labs in Ukraine) was plastered in most biolab stories. I do have a question, though. Since it's been 17 years, how long does it take to render such labs safe and not requiring American help? I guess that's a rhetorical question on my part.
One of my favorite quotes comes from Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, who said,
"There may be damage done or theft and they may in fact misuse some of the material that's there that is not intended for weapon purposes but nevertheless could be used in dangerous ways."
In other words, white hats versus black hats determines the label to place on pathogens. Maybe Haines worked for a tobacco company in her youth. Or the NRA.
Ukraine's President Zelensky said,
"And no chemical or any other weapons of mass destruction were developed on my land."
I would feel better had Zelensky simply said that no weapons of mass destruction were in Ukraine. Instead, he opted for none having been "developed" in Ukraine.
So the 99.99% of Americans who didn't know U.S.-backed biolabs were in Ukraine woke up one day to discover that there are biolabs everywhere, and we wouldn't have learned this except for the Russkies and the Chinese. Yeah, that's where we are these days.
Russian Fairy Tales
The Russians are pushing their own propaganda, of course, but a lot of their stuff is so out there that it belongs in a "bleach speech." For example, they claim biolabs were genetically targeting Russians as opposed to Ukrainians. I'd love to know how the U.S. was supposed to pull that off. Putin's seen the last Bond film, No Time to Die, way too many times.
And then there are allegedly drones dropping infected birds (which is an interesting idea, I must admit, unless they're dropping turkeys) and all kinds of crazy Man from U.N.C.L.E. plotlines out there in Russian propaganda land. The Russian tales are semi-nonsensical, but the Americans fumbling around trying to explain biolabs in an obvious potential war zone is just idiotic.
Conclusion
The Rubio/Nuland exchange was on C-SPAN, so there was no hiding it. However, the exchange in full, or even the parts I've quoted in the last two entries, did not make it onto CNN or MSNBC. Instead, it got a mention here and a line there.
I suspect Americans are backed into a corner. One or more of those labs may already have been compromised. If I had to guess, my inclination is to think that could have already happened, so the blame game is rolling. The Rubio/Nuland exchange may have been preemptive foreshadowing for a disaster that's already in progress.
Bob Dietz
March 15, 2022
