- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DNI Gabbard Releases US-Funded Biolab Evidence, including Ukraine
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:45 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:45 am to SlowFlowPro
Credible!
0
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:46 am to Placekicker
Again, dishonesty.
The X posts says
The question, however, was something different.
He asked about "the issue of military biological labs in Ukraine" not "biological labs"
If the argument was strong, they wouldn't have to rely on this dishonesty for NPC lemmings
The X posts says
quote:
March 9, 2022: John Kirby was asked if there was any truth whatsoever to Russia’s claims that the U.S. was developing biological labs in Ukraine
The question, however, was something different.
He asked about "the issue of military biological labs in Ukraine" not "biological labs"
If the argument was strong, they wouldn't have to rely on this dishonesty for NPC lemmings
This post was edited on 6/14/26 at 8:47 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The MSM of 2022-2023 remains victorious.
Here’s another of 2022 MSM’s greatest hits…
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. With Tulsi Gabbard's new revelations about US bio labs in many countries around the world including Ukraine, it's fascinating recall the bizarre series of events that gave rise to this controversy in the first place:
In May of 2022, some of us began asking whether the US had bio labs in Ukraine, what they were for, and why the US had them there. For asking those questions, we were instantly branded as "pro-Russian conspiracy theorists" in official Ukrainian intel reports, on our Wikipedia pages, by countless media outlets, etc. This was and remains one of the most bizarre episodes I've ever seen.
Before May 2022, when we asked those questions, barely anyone had ever thought about let alone asked about "bio weapons in Ukraine"! I certainly hadn't. Like most people, I had never mentioned a word about it because it had never occurred to me we had them there.
But then, Marco Rubio summoned Victoria Nuland to the Senate and asked her in a televised hearing under oath about these "rumors," clearly expecting her to immediately debunk them as obvious Kremlin lies and to proclaim the US had no such bio labs in Ukraine.
Instead, Nuland did the opposite! She *confirmed* key aspects of these "rumors," and she explicitly warned that the US has several "bio research labs" in Ukraine that are so dangerous that they must not be allowed to fall into Russia's hands.
When some of us heard Nuland's rather shocking admission -- the first-ever disclosure about these labs -- we of course asked: wait! what? Why does the US have bio labs in Ukraine, and what are the US and Ukraine doing in those labs that make them (in Nuland's eyes) so dangerous?? (Note: nobody ever suggested that the presence of these bio labs in Ukraine justified the Russian invasion; we just wanted answers about these US bio labs that Nuland had casually divulged).
We never got real answers. We got smear campaigns. To this day, our names are formally attached to claims that we spread "conspiracy theories" for asking about these labs even though it was Victoria Nuland herself who was the one who accidentally revealed them for the first time in a Senate hearing in response to a shocked Marco Rubio. They then quickly tried shutting down any questioning by pretending that Nuland never said this, and it was just a bunch of paid Kremlin mouthpieces who were spreading lies.
You see the same tactics now being against Tulsi for releasing this new intelligence report. Watch the Nuland testimony in question:
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:48 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Do you even read your own posts?
quote: “Ukraine does not have a biological weapons program. There are no Ukrainian biological weapons laboratories supported by the United States – not near Russia’s border or anywhere— it has absolutely nothing to do with biological weapons.”
Counselor, this has just been proven to have been a lie. It was a lie in 2022. It’s a lie now.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:49 am to Placekicker
quote:
Counselor, this has just been proven to have been a lie.
Where is the evidence of biological weapons?
Not GOF. Not viral research. Not "bio labs". Weapons.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:51 am to Placekicker
quote:
In May of 2022, some of us began asking whether the US had bio labs in Ukraine, what they were for, and why the US had them there. For asking those questions, we were instantly branded as "pro-Russian conspiracy theorists" in official Ukrainian intel reports, on our Wikipedia pages, by countless media outlets, etc. This was and remains one of the most bizarre episodes I've ever seen.
Again, dishonest, and these tweets form the time keep showing how this is a dishonest reframing of the past.
quote:
When some of us heard Nuland's rather shocking admission -- the first-ever disclosure about these labs -- we of course asked: wait! what? Why does the US have bio labs in Ukraine, and what are the US and Ukraine doing in those labs that make them (in Nuland's eyes) so dangerous??
Proving my point from page one, YET AGAIN
quote:
Can you define the specific conspiracy theory?
Very few, if any, people said we funded no "bio labs" in Ukraine. The actual CT allegations were much more specific as to the type of bio labs and what kind of activity was going on.
This seems like your typical "kernel of truth" situation and not a "CT proven right" situation.
LINK
Why do y'all keep posting things that directly prove me right?
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:53 am to SlowFlowPro
Slowmasturbatingpro I am right!
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:54 am to SlowFlowPro
Again, to repeat for those who are slow
Why I call this the "kernel of truth" fallacy, a spinoff from the Motte and Bailey Fallacy:
The motte: There are "bio labs" in Ukraine (the kernel of truth)
The bailey: The "bio labs" in Ukraine are part of a biological weapons program (dishonest conflation extrapolated from the kernel of truth)
quote:
bio labs =/= bio weapons program
proving bio labs exist = kernel of truth
trying to extrapolate that kernel of truth into bio weapons program is dishonest and not supported by the facts
Why I call this the "kernel of truth" fallacy, a spinoff from the Motte and Bailey Fallacy:
quote:
The motte-and-bailey fallacy is a debate tactic where someone conflates an easily defensible, uncontroversial claim (the "motte") with a controversial, bold claim (the "bailey"). They strategically use the safety of the motte to dodge criticism for the bailey, often acting as if defending the former proves the latter.
The motte: There are "bio labs" in Ukraine (the kernel of truth)
The bailey: The "bio labs" in Ukraine are part of a biological weapons program (dishonest conflation extrapolated from the kernel of truth)
This post was edited on 6/14/26 at 8:55 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:55 am to SlowFlowPro
That's actually where my head is at. If we set aside the labels for a second and ask what an offensive biological weapons program would physically look like, what would we expect to find?
E.g, if someone posted a slide showing pathogen surveillance, sequencing, diagnostics, lab training, etc, I can see both military and civilian uses.
What activities would make people say "that's a weapons program" rather than "that's biodefense/public health"?
E.g, if someone posted a slide showing pathogen surveillance, sequencing, diagnostics, lab training, etc, I can see both military and civilian uses.
What activities would make people say "that's a weapons program" rather than "that's biodefense/public health"?
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Not GOF. Not viral research. Not "bio labs". Weapons
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. But the US is funding Biolabs in Ukraine that manufacture
Anthrax
Tularaemia
Tuberculosis
Swine Fever
New Castles Disease
MERS
SARS
Marburg
Ebola
Given that they have lied about their gain of function research in the past, it only takes about two seconds to realize that they are playing with these as well; any one of them could be turned into a biological weapon.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 8:59 am to TigerDoc
quote:
If we set aside the labels for a second and ask what an offensive biological weapons program would physically look like, what would we expect to find?
Not gain of function research, that's for sure.
quote:
E.g, if someone posted a slide showing pathogen surveillance, sequencing, diagnostics, lab training, etc, I can see both military and civilian uses.
Exactly why this is ripe for conflation for NPC types.
quote:
What activities would make people say "that's a weapons program" rather than "that's biodefense/public health"?
The activity being done (research on viruses, for example) and the output (scientific scholarship and/or the actual substances being produced).
Only AlterEd has been brave enough to claim basic biological lab work creates a biological weapons program. Otherwise, you'll need an actual biological weapons pathogen/research to show that I reckon. Like, if a ton of Sarin gas is being produced, or research is being done on how to produce a different type of Sarin gas, we can be pretty sure that's a bioweapons lab. If the research is standard virology, regardless of the type of manipulation, then it's unlikely to be a bioweapon (for intelligent, logical people at least).
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:00 am to Placekicker
quote:
But the US is funding Biolabs in Ukraine that manufacture
Anthrax
Tularaemia
Tuberculosis
Swine Fever
New Castles Disease
MERS
SARS
Marburg
Ebola
For virology research. Not weapons research.
Those are regular viruses that have to be produced to study. They are not weapons outside of anthrax.
You keep proving my point.
This post was edited on 6/14/26 at 9:01 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why do y'all keep posting things that directly prove me right?
What tickles me is that you actually believe the lies told by these people. When your proof is based on their falsehoods, you don’t have any place to stand, Counselor.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
For virology research. Not weapons research.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
For virology research. Not weapons research
Of course, Counselor. No one would ever weaponize a virus.
Oh wait…
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Only AlterEd has been brave enough to claim basic biological lab work creates a biological weapons program.
Placekicker is claiming what ODNI released suggests we're "manufacturing" that long list of diseases in his latest post.
Does anyone see anything that suggests manufacturing? Defensive and offensive programs will have disease agents in them (you need those for developing/scaling up diagnostics, vaccines, therapeutics).
Is there evidence of what we would see for offensive capabilities here?
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:03 am to Placekicker
quote:
What tickles me is that you actually believe the lies told by these people.
What tickles me is you don't understand that I'm not doing that.
I'm only pointing out what they wrote has yet to be debunked, and people attempting to do so today are using dishonest arguments and fallacies to lie about debunking them.
quote:
When your proof is based on their falsehoods, you don’t have any place to stand, Counselor.
Why ae you describing your own arguments?
This post was edited on 6/14/26 at 9:03 am
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:04 am to SlowFlowPro
Debonked mind you!
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:06 am to Placekicker
quote:
Of course, Counselor. No one would ever weaponize a virus.
Oh wait…
You dodged the question as to who released CV19 when your attempt at a conspiracy was preemptively destroyed. Don't think i didn't notice.
Although its bold of you to pretend only a page later that you didn't avoid answering.
Covid was accidentally released from a Chinese lab.
China tried to cover it up and use its influence to have people cover for China (creating all the silly talking points about bat soup and what not). Why China did this is self-explanatory.
China may have lost more from CV19 than any other country. They were huge losers from the release compared to the rest of the world.
The US came out the best after the pandemic. They were huge winners compared to the rest of the world.
Try to make your theory work within that reality.
Posted on 6/14/26 at 9:07 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Is there evidence of what we would see for offensive capabilities here?
No.
They are NPCs parroting talking points. They don't actually understand what they're repeating.
Which is why they keep posting X posts that literally prove my argument correct, over and over again.
These NPCs take the text of these posts at face value and don't even watch the videos contained within to see how the text is not truthful.
Page 24 of 29
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News