NBC News debunks the conspiracy theorists who have claimed that Russia invaded Ukraine to eliminate biolabs funded by the United States. The main promoters of this claim are QAnon, Tucker Carlson, and the Russian propaganda machine.
It begins:
Russia’s early struggles to push disinformation and propaganda about Ukraine have picked up momentum in recent days, thanks to a variety of debunked conspiracy theories about biological research labs in Ukraine. Much of the false information is flourishing in Russian social media, far-right online spaces and U.S. conservative media, including Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News.
The theories, which have been boosted by Russian and Chinese officials, come as U.S. officials warn that Russia could be preparing a chemical or biological weapons attack of its own in Ukraine.
Most of the conspiracy theories claim that the U.S. was developing and plotting to release a bioweapon or potentially another coronavirus from “biolabs”’ throughout Ukraine and that Russia invaded to take over the labs. Many of the theories implicate people who are often the targets of far-right conspiracy thinking — including Dr. Anthony Fauci and President Joe Biden — as being behind creating the weaponized diseases in the biolabs.
Disinformation experts said the biolabs theory echoes other Russian propaganda meant to justify its military efforts, which often makes allegations against other countries and populations that reflect similar attacks it plans to make.
Question: If this was the Russian goal, why are they also bombing apartment houses, maternity hospitals, schools, and residential areas? Is all of Ukraine one giant biolab?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It seems to me that you, Diane Ravitch, are also spreading misinformation. It so happens that just a few days ago the Chinese ambassador to the UN requested the US come clean on these biolabs.
SO, your put credence in the chinese misinformation as well as the Russian. I sometimes wonder if our critics have been rightk, we DID do a lousy job of educating.
Peskyvera, why don’t you come clean (that might be impossible) and reveal who you work for (Hmmm, any answer might be a lie)?
Waste of time.
Just because an alleged Chinese ambassador to the UN wants the US to come clean on “these” biolabs, isn’t evidence of “those” alleged biolabs.
But to be honest, I want those allegations to be true and the US to release those alleged bioweapons on Russia ASAP before Putin starts WWIII and destroys the planet with nuclear warfare.
The only good Putin is a DEAD Putin!
It’s sad how a blog for teachers keeps repeating McCarthyite slurs that anyone who dissents must be a Russian agent. History didn’t put McCarthy in a very good light.
Dienne, this is not a blog for teachers. It is a blog for everyone who cares about better education. It is also my blog, so I write about whatever I find interesting. Copyright law. Films. Politics. Whatever.
It’s sad how someone on a blog for teachers is unwilling to say anything critical of Putin but makes abhorrent McCarthyite slurs against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib.
History did not put those who hate democracy and love murderous authoritarian leaders in a very good light.
It is important to remind folks that dienne77’s post is a prime example of the Russian/right wing Republican propaganda in which you accuse others of doing what you do you.
dienne77 has made McCarthyite attacks on the progressive politicians in the Squad, but she never has a bad word to say about the politician who murders his political opponents and bombs civilian targets and has slaughtered so many people in Ukraine.
It is important to remind folks that this is trolling propaganda by the same person who also could not criticize Trump.
There are no U.S. biolabs in Ukraine. That’s Putin propaganda.
Victoria Nuland testified at a congressional hearing and confirmed that there are biolabs in Ukraine. She also confirmed U.S. fears that they might be taken by Russia.
Linda Qiu
By Linda Qiu
March 11, 2022
WASHINGTON — Prominent social media users and conservative voices have amplified a baseless theory promoted by Russian state media accusing the United States of funding biological weapons laboratories in Ukraine.
There is no evidence to support the claims, which President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, the White House, the Pentagon and the State Department have all unequivocally denied.
There are biological laboratories inside Ukraine, and since 2005, the United States has provided backing to a number of institutions to prevent the production of biological weapons. But Tucker Carlson, the Fox News host, and others have misleadingly cited remarks from American officials as proof that the labs are producing or conducting research on biological weapons.
“Out of nowhere, the Biden official in charge of Ukraine confirmed the story,” Mr. Carlson said on his program Thursday night. “Victoria Nuland, the under secretary of state, casually mentioned in a Senate hearing on Tuesday that actually, yes, the Biden administration does fund a series of biolabs in Ukraine.”
Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky, characterized Ms. Nuland’s remarks as a “serious admission.” Donald Trump Jr., the son of the former president, tweeted that her comments propelled the claim from “conspiracy theory to fact.”
Mr. Carlson also pointed to an interview with Robert Pope, the director of the Pentagon’s Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, which helps countries in the former Soviet Union secure or eliminate nuclear and chemical weapons.
“As Pope put it, scientists are scientists, they don’t want to destroy all the bioweapons,” Mr. Carlson continued in his segment. “Instead, they’re using them to conduct new bioweapons research — that’s what he said.”
Mr. Carlson mischaracterized those remarks from Ms. Nuland and Mr. Pope.
In congressional testimony this week, Ms. Nuland, the under secretary of state for political affairs, was asked by Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, whether Ukraine has chemical or biological weapons.
“Ukraine has biological research facilities which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to gain control of,” she responded. “So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach.”
If there were a biological or chemical weapon attack inside Ukraine, Mr. Rubio asked, would there be any doubt that Russia was behind it?
“There is no doubt in my mind, Senator, and it is classic Russian technique to blame the other guy what they’re planning to do themselves,” Ms. Nuland responded.
peskyvera,
Are you a TROLL?
Peskyvera uses a European server. I have asked repeatedly where she is, but she has not replied.
Peskyvera, you seem politically naïve. To me it makes great sense that China would take such a stand before the UN– it’s a tit-for-tat against US, where there is a continued push by some to claim that the global pandemic can be blamed on the Chinese biolabs for artificially developing super-covid viruses in labs & then letting such a virus escape through negligence. [Although that remains a possible scenario, it’s key to note that US scientists collaborated in those experiments, & also that nearly all investigations including a very recent study support the wet-market theory].
It is all a game to Putin. Throw it against the wall and see if it sticks. Putin wants to be ‘The Great’ power ruling the world and being the bully who will stop at nothing to get what he wants.
Ukraine does have biolabs that the U.S. is worried about falling into Russian hands (Victoria Nuland admitted this in a very awkward exchange with Marco Rubio in which he clearly did not expect her answer). If these labs were benign, what would be the worry?
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Marco+Rubio+Victoria+Nuland+Video&&view=detail&mid=6725618E019DF44A120A6725618E019DF44A120A&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3DMarco%2BRubio%2BVictoria%2BNuland%2BVideo%26FORM%3DHDRSC3
Dienne, Russian propaganda says that the U.S. has biolabs in Ukraine. No one else does.
Dienne,
Thanks for the link!
Universities all over the world have biolabs.
It is astonishing to hear this person repeating these ridiculous excuses for the murderous rage she feels against Ukraine and her desire to see more civilians in Ukraine annihilated by Putin.
The only danger to Putin Ukraine posed is that it might become a more progressive country. dienne77 has always hated progressives with a passion — her ugly and nasty smears of the Squad just this week makes that clear.
On various occasions dienne77 poses as progressive to give her attacks on democrats more credibility, but she should be ignored as any neo-Nazi attacking Democrats should be ignored. It doesn’t matter if sometimes she posts truths when she posts lies so many times.
Just because a rabid neo-Nazi has a good position on the minimum wage does not mean they should be presented as honest and respectable folks offering an opinion that we should listen to. It simply elevates their profile and gives them a credibility they don’t deserve when they start posting their ugly lies similar to the lies telling us that killing civilians – even children and babies – in Ukraine is necessary for the good for their authoritarian leader.
Actually, the labs are real. Nuland made it very clear that they do exist. She testified in the Congress. Department of Defense confirmed that later. See the links in my another post(down below).
I don’t agree with NBC’s total dismissal of concern, but they are right about one thing.
There is no evidence that Russia will target and seize them to make biological weapons.
That’s where this biolab allegation turns into propaganda.
“There is no evidence that Russia will target and seize them to make biological weapons.” Presumably because Russia already has plenty of their own labs making biological weapons.
See my reply stating what those “labs” are. What is propaganda? That these labs are justification for Putin’s murderous attack on Ukraine civilians and massive destruction of a country?
Or that these labs are exactly what Nuland said they are.
I’m not saying they will never do that. I’m simply indicating that this can be exploited by mainstream media as misinformation. No one is making such a bold claim yet. Not even, DHS or US national intelligence. You just have to wait and see. (Of course, it all depends on how much you can trust mainstream media for its verification.)
More importantly, this is not just the matter of what Russian state media is doing. People who are calling out anti-American or pro-Russia are making it worse.
Last week, Mitt Romney accused Tulsi Gabbard of parroting Russian propaganda, when she echoed exactly what Victoria Nuland said in the Congress. That’s not misinformation at all. He lashed out simply because he just didn’t like what she said on twitter. So did Adam Kinzinger. In MSNBC’s The View, a host Whoopi Goldberg and Ana Navarro even suggested that DOJ investigate dissenters over their claims for possible Russian collusion(and hence, arrest them for treason). Demanding federal investigation for the viewpoints they don’t agree with? Why are these people behaving as if they were living in the Cold War period? That’s really beyond me.
To be sure, Russia is in full swing of propaganda. It’s predictable. But that doesn’t keep us from critiquing war narrative disseminated from corporate US media and tweaked by elites and pundits. Seeing neocons and pro-war pundits rant and scream on cable news, air, and social media 24/7 is just as pernicious as enemy’s all-out disinformation campaign.
Ken says about Tulsi Gabbard:
“she echoed exactly what Victoria Nuland said in the Congress. That’s not misinformation at all.”
That is not true. Nuland never said that Putin was justified in murdering Ukraine babies and children because biolabs existed. Nuland never said that these biolabs were making biological weapons.
Instead of being critical of Putin, Tulsi Gabbard cited the existence of biolabs that “might” have been making weapons as a reason that Putin is justified in annihilating as many civilians as he wanted in Ukraine. Not only that, but Tulsi intentionally misled folks into believing that biolabs were manufacturing biological weapons, thus supporting her belief that Putin bombing the heck out of Ukraine and killing many babies and children could be justified by the existence of biolabs.
Biolabs exist everywhere. No one “denied their existence”. They denied Tulsi Gabbard’s claim that the existence of biolabs in Ukraine justifies Putin’s bombing the heck out of the country.
Either you agree with Tulsi or not. But do not equate Tulsi’s claim that Putin’s invasion is a good thing because of biolabs to anything that Nuland told Congress. Putin’s invasion is a very bad thing and if Tulsi Gabbard can’t say that – because of her inane comment about “biolabs” – it makes her a very bad person.
“Nuland never said that Putin was justified in murdering Ukraine babies and children because biolabs existed. Nuland never said that these biolabs were making biological weapons.”
None of this statement above came from the mouth of Tulsi Gabbard, either. It sounds like gossip coming from social media troll farm.
Ken Watanavbe,
Please don’t spread falsehoods about how Tulsi Gabbard has condemned Putin’s bombing of babies and children of Ukraine.
Gabbard is a Putin apologist, period. When Putin is in the midst of a horrific attack decimating Ukraine and killing children and babies, and Americans are rightly outraged and condemning Putin, Tulsi Gabbard is not. Instead, Tulsi is repeating the very talking points Putin suddenly staarted to use (since the Nazi talking points weren’t working) about how Ukraine “might” be making bioweapons.
Feel free to find a quote where Tulsi Gabbard strongly condemns Putin for the horrors he has unleashed on civilians – including children and babies – of Ukraine. Prove me wrong. Prove to me that Gabbard is critical of Putin’s most reprehensible actions and the false innuendo that Gabbard made about “biolabs” being biological weapons was not just another example of Gabbard parroting Putin’s propaganda to justify his murderous rampage on Ukraine.
Those who refused to condemn Hitler and instead parroted Nazi propaganda to justify Hitler’s most violent and abhorrent actions against civilians were Nazis. Whether they admitted it or not.
I am happy to be proven wrong when you show me a quote where Tulsi is as rabidly critical of Putin as she is the Democrats.
NYC public school parent
I stand by what I said. Tulsi Gabbard is right. Mitt Romney and Adam Kinzinger are wrong. Here’s exactly what she said about the existence of biolab. She did research on DoD.
She made it very clear what’s at stake.
You can still argue she’s a Putin apologist, pro-Russian, or whatever simply because she regularly appears in Tucker Carlson’s show. That will only prove her point is valid.
Ken,
She is a Putin apologist because she is a Putin apologist.
If you can’t condemn Hitler, you are a Hitler apologist. If you can’t condemn Putin, you are a Putin apologist. If you are saying “I just don’t know enough to know whether what Hitler or Putin did was worthy of criticism, you should not be cited by anyone as a credible source.
Why would you link to that meaningless Gabbard tweet that she posted after getting JUSTLY criticized for her earlier comments where she invoked biolabs to excuse Putin’s murderous rampage over Ukraine?
You linked to a tweet that sounds like the Republicans in September tweeting “Biden must bring peace to the people of Afghanistan.”
Such remarkable insight from Gabbard! lol. As if folks who have the ethical and moral center that Tulsi lacks have not already been thinking about how to secure those labs against Putin’s murderous rampage back when Tulsi was still invoking Nazis or whatever she was using to excuse Putin’s rampage against Ukraine.
I spoke of this elsewhere — the low standard in which we hold folks like Tulsi is what is ruining democracy. She is no different than Tucker Carlson or Matt Gaetz — start treating her that way instead of presenting anything she says as if she is a brilliant observer! lol! “we should secure the biolabs that I was invoking to excuse Putin’s invasion but got criticized for so now I will just say they should be secured!” Duh.
Does Russia have biolabs? Do we have biolabs? China? Russia should invade itself so it can destroy its own biolabs and chemical munitions depots.
from msn.com: Quote – Only Japan used chemical and biological weapons in World War II. None of the other great powers did, even though they all had programs to one degree or another. [snip]
And then, by the late ’60s, early ’70s, there was a push to ban biological weapons. And that resulted in the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, which banned development, production and acquisition of biological weapons. This was the first invoked treaty to eliminate an entire class of weapons of mass destruction. So it was kind of very groundbreaking that way. [snip]
The one big shortfall to that treaty, though, is that there’s no verification mechanism attached to it. There’s no international organization to verify that countries are actually complying with the treaty. [snip]
By the late ’80s, there was widespread use of chemical weapons by Iraq against Iran. There were concerns that Libya was building chemical weapons, and the Cold War was winding down, so all these conditions made it possible for there to be the creation of a Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993.
The US is required under the treaty to destroy its remaining stockpiles of chemical weapons by September 30, 2023. Currently, it still has tons of chemical weapons, including sarin and VX, awaiting destruction in Pueblo, Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky, according to the Arms Control Association.) end quote
Are atomic bombs chemical weapons? Is anybody familiar with Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Civilians in Afghanistan are on the verge of starvation. Our hands are not clean.
Abigail,
Are you really this sick of a person saying it is okay for Putin to murder children and babies in Ukraine because of Hiroshima?
Is it okay for Putin to murder children and babies in Ukraine?
Is it okay for Putin to murder your own children and your friend’s babies in the US?
You keep citing your own dirty hands as an American and how you know you have dirty hands because America bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So I can’t figure out if you just hate Ukraine children, or if you really would be fine if Putin bombed your own children because you believe your own hands are so dirty.
Either way, it is pretty awful that you keep justifying what Putin is doing to other people’s children.
Who said our hands are pure and clean? Not I. Yes, we have done horrible things but how does that excuse Putin from the massive crimes he’s committing in Ukraine.
As regards the atomic bombs used in WWII: the Japanese attacked us initially at Pearl Harbor, did you forget that part. The Japanese refused to surrender unconditionally until the 2nd atomic bomb was dropped. We fire bombed Japanese cities and they still refused to surrender. The Japanese were clearly losing the war in 1945 but they refused to surrender unconditionally until the 2nd A-bomb was dropped. Of course it was all horrific but this was a war that we were dragged into by Japan initially and then Germany declared war on us a few days after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Our hands are not clean.
No, they aren’t. And this will be really important to remember going forward.
Do as I say, NOT as I do.
Reality is what I say it is.
The truth is what I say it is.
We know the best, we are the best,
think like us, follow us, become
like us, and all will be well.
Listen up believers and non-believers,
Catholics and non-Catholics, Baptists
and non-Baptists, Christians and non-
Christians, Jews and non-Jews, Muslims
and non-Muslims, sheep and goats, godly
and ungodly, worshipers and infidels,
saved and unsaved, redeemed and rejected,
resurrected and damned, WE have
access to the TRUTH that YOU
fail to DISCERN.
Make no mistake, out of all the peoples,
on the face of the earth, WE are
set apart for the maintenance of the
proper social order and the securing
of the right social growth.
The proof is in the pudding…
I was one of the first evidently to post on this but it sure engendered a lot of other blogs also thanks for emailing this to me. I do not get her blogs now.
On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 10:01 AM Diane Ravitch’s blog wrote:
> dianeravitch posted: ” NBC News debunks the conspiracy theorists who have > claimed that Russia invaded Ukraine to eliminate biolabs funded by the > United States. The main promoters of this claim are QAnon, Tucker Carlson, > and the Russian propaganda machine. It begins: Rus” >
I am not justifying Putin’s actions. I am merely pointing out the rank hypocrisy of some comments posted here.
Look at your own rank hypocrisy, Abigail Shure
Saying none of has can criticize Putin and sacrificing other people’s children to your hypocrisy? That’s about as rank as it gets.
European settlers committed genocide against the Native American population. Let’s be more realistic in our appraisals of the actions of others.
What you mean is “let’s be more realistic in our appraisals of the actions of others who act violently against other people’s children.”
Would you be “more realistic” in your appraisal if it was your children or grandchildren being bombed and Putin said he was just doing what you did to Native Americans?
You are the one who keeps saying that you believe your hands are dirty because of all the bad things your own country has done. You are the one believes we have no right to criticize when other people’s children are bombed by Putin.
Do you have a right to criticize when your own family is bombed?
So Abigail is saying that because the European settlers committed genocide against the indigenous peoples in “America,” then we have no right to say anything against any other country? Putin is slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, women, babies, men, but just shut up because of Vietnam? Can’t we have both conversations, one does not negate the other. The Iraq war should have never happened but that does not excuse Putin from his war crimes nor does it mean that we should remain silent. By logical extension, Abigail implies that we have no right to criticize Hitler and his war crimes because of our own crimes of slavery and genocide against the indigenous peoples.
Abigail, this is some feeble-minded analysis. What do you do if you’re robbed? Do you tell yourself, “Well, I’ve done some bad things myself, it would be hypocritical for me to condemn the person who robbed me”?
Abigail, your point is? That the world should ignore Putin’s mass slaughter of Ukrainians? Even the neutral nations of Switzerland and Finland have condemned it.
It is, of course, illegal under international law for a U.N. member nation to invade another U.N. member nation except in a proportional way to stop an ongoing genocide or an imminent danger to its own nationals such as an intercepted plan to use weapons of mass destruction against those nationals. So, Russia has been attempting to cook up pretexts for its brutal invasion of another U.N. member state, and as it becomes clear that these aren’t credible pretexts, they move on to the next ones. So, first it was that they weren’t going to invade; they were just conducting exercises. Then it was that they were invading to stop the supposedly Nazi Ukrainian nation. Then it was to stop a nonexistent genocide. Now its biological weapons.
EVERY COUNTRY HAS BIOLOGICAL LABS. Every high school. Every university. Many, many, many companies Some of these labs are doing legitimate research using very dangerous agents and organisms. That’s how we develop defenses against Ebola and Covid. No one has shown the slightest bit of evidence that the United States and/or Ukraine has biological weapons development laboratories in Ukraine, though it wouldn’t surprise me at all if there were laboratories doing research on countering the effects of such dangerous materials as the Novichok nerve agents that KGB Putin uses to murder rivals and dissenters.
Of course. “Biological Labs”! lol!
That’s like saying “CRT” is being taught in every public school, brainwashing students.
You expand the definition of something that is easy to demonize by presenting a false reality that convinces folks that your definition of “biological labs” that are rampant means “biological warfare labs”, just like you present the false reality that convinces folks that your definition of “CRT” that is rampant in schools is teaching all white students that they are evil and the US is an evil nation.
It’s hard to fight when the known liars who constantly say false things are not marginalized but instead treated with respect because they also say some truthful things and anyone who doesn’t lie 100% of the time, but only 50% or even “just 30% of the time” still should be given the same credibility as people who don’t believe in telling lies to get what they want.
Does anyone find the Putinese posted here credible? Few do, I think. And it’s all easily refuted.
Bob,
Have those posting “the Putinese” lost their credibility on everything? Have they lost their credibility, period? Because they should lose all credibility, even if they make other posts supporting their point of view that isn’t full of lies.
If the anti-public school folks are presented as “credible” people every time they happen to say something that is truthful about public schools (some are failing! Some teachers are bad!) and people just say, “oh we will correct them during the times they say something false but the other times we will say that they have good points”, you are legitimizing those folks and empowering them.
Meanwhile, they are demonizing teachers and those that support public schools entirely and they are de-legitmizing and disempowering the pro-public school side. Teachers and unions lost so much credibility with the media, while the folks who lie a lot have gained credibility. And there is something very wrong about that.
Anyone who pushes dishonest propaganda to demonize public schools and public school teachers should lose all credibility, even if they later use something that happens to be true to defend their rabidly anti-public school stance.
If people cannot defend their anti-public school positions without lying, then they should not be trusted on anything.
NYC, the truth of a proposition is only in very rare and artificial situations dependent upon who is stating it. It’s person independent. Thinking that it is person dependent has a name. It’s called the Genetic Fallacy.
Bob,
It is impossible for anyone to know the facts about everything. We all depend on sources. They are either credible sources or sources that should NOT BE TRUSTED even if once in a while or even half the time they say something true. I don’t care if Fox News tells me something because it is not a credible news source. I tend to believe more of what the NYT says, but with skepticism, because they do offer corrections when they make blatant errors. When I was in high school, we were taught the difference between using a source like the Washington Post and a source like the National Enquirer. It’s not that the National Enquirer could sometimes be right and the Washington Post could sometimes be wrong. It was that the National Enquirer did not care if they were right or wrong. That’s why they weren’t a credible source, even if they were correct.
If students are no longer taught what credibility is, but are told that even someone that lies might be telling the truth at any given time and that means they are just as credible a source as any other source, then democracy is in real danger.
That is certainly the reality the right wing wants us all to accept.
I have made errors in what I post here. If they are pointed out to me, I check to see if I might have gotten something wrong and correct it. My goal is to be honest, not win some game.
If you don’t believe that makes everything I post far more credible than everything that dienne77 posts – whether or not you happen to agree with my opinion – then I don’t even know why I am on this blog.
If there is no difference between folks who try to tell the truth and folks who believes lies in service of making people agree with their point of view is fine, then we live in an Orwellian society already, and this blog (which I always believed was filled with people who valued truth and believed credibility came with being honest) isn’t the place for me.
Diane Ravitch is – to me – one of the most credible people ever because she acknowledged she was wrong when she saw more evidence that showed her that. She earned her credibility.
Her efforts to speak truthfully should never be compared to folks who frequently use falsehoods and work to mislead. Folks that try to mislead over and over again should be marginalized, not “respected” when they happen to be telling the truth.
So, has Comrade Carlson received, yet, his Hero of the Russian Federation award yet? Lord knows, he is already a superstar on Russian state-run propaganda TV (the only kind of TV that now exists in Putin’s Police State).
yet . . . yet
Nyet
Charles Koch’s mistake that trapped Putin- Americans don’t have as much of an appetitive for social Darwinism as the ruthless think.
Note to Koch and Putin- don’t believe your own PR.
LOL. This is what happens, inevitably, ineluctably, to autocrats. The people around them fear their power and won’t speak truth to them. They fawn and kow-tow and amplify to curry favor. And the autocrat begins to believe his (rarely her) own bs. They all become more and more monstrous. And cut off from reality. And stupid.
E.g., Bill Gates on education issues. He’s at the point now where he is totally shielded from actual information about the effects of what he has been doing. So, his initial rapaciousness and personality disorders and megalomania were increasingly compounded with cluelessness. This is what always happens with autocrats.
Accurate
Am I to understand that the US was justified in the use of nuclear weapons due to the Japanese refusal to surrender? Let’s try applying that analogy to the current conflict and see where that gets us,
No. It absolutely was not justified in doing this. The rest of the world understands this. Many in the U.S. do not. At the time when these bombs were dropped, the US had already laid Japan flat, destroying most of its major cities with conventional bombing. The Japanese high command was debating the terms of its surrender. The dropping of these weapons, in my view, was an avoidable horror of the first magnitude. I was excoriated here, previously, for stating my opinion about that.
Attacking civilians is not acceptable. It’s a war crime under the Rome Statute. Period. It’s illegal under international law, and Putin is, therefore, a war criminal.
Add it to the GOP Playbook – – “Biolabs” and the rally screams with joy. “CRT” and the brown shirts begin to chant. “Hillary” and the crowd goes wild. “Hunter’s laptop” and the flags start waving. (BTW – Have we not seen the prototype for Putin’s rally the other day somewhere else, like in mara-lago maga-world?)
As for Fox and tucker and Hawley and cruz — supporting a war on democracy – supporting a war on the Capitol on January 6 and Ukraine today – – AIDING AND ABETTING!
yup
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/19/us-depleted-uranium-weapons-civilian-areas-iraq
Take a look at this folks.
BTW, I am curious as to why my previous Iraq comment has disappeared. 😳
Yeah. This was REALLY evil. I posted about this on Diane’s blog a few days ago. Horrific. Radiological weapons used against civilians. Definitely a war crime. You know, like the war crimes being committed by Putin right now.
I’m reading a lot of examples of both whataboutism and the Genetic Fallacy from commenters on these posts you’ve been making about the aggression against Ukraine, Diane. Thank you for those, btw. The comments go like this:
Jack: Putin is killing innocent civilians!
Jacqueline: But you Americans killed Indians!
The idea being that anything said or done by Americans must be false because Americans have done all this bad stuff. Not rational thinking.
Yes, we English teachers teach our students to consider the quality of their sources. But that doesn’t change the fact that whether a proposition is true is completely independent of the source of the proposition, except in very special circumstances of the kinds cooked up for scholastic arguments by epistemologists. Whether ducks have feathers is independent of Jeffrey Dahmer or Hitler’s having said, “Ducks have feathers.”
So, for example, if I said, “”Dienne77 is saying this sentence,” that would be an exception to the rule. Weird things happen with self-referencing statements.
If one student is citing dienne77 as their source of evidence for “ducks have feathers” and another student is citing Diane Ravitch as their source of evidence for “ducks have feathers”, they should be taught that one source is credible and one source is not.
It doesn’t matter if both folks happen to be saying “ducks have feathers”. A source that lies isn’t credible, period. If this time that dishonest person isn’t lying, there will be someone else who is credible saying the same thing who can be cited.
Credibility is earned. It isn’t something that is decided on a case by case basis depending on whether that person happens to be saying something true this time or saying something you like.
Citing a source that sometimes says true things and sometimes says false things is not okay because this time that person is saying something true.
If it is true, then the student should use a CREDIBLE source who says it, not a source that lies a lot.
A source that lies a lot should be taught they will never be believed about anything until they stop lying. If they can’t stop lying, even if they only lie some of the time, they should never be believed. If they are telling the truth this time, it doesn’t matter because other people will credibility will be saying the same truth and THEY are the ones who should be listened to.
I don’t think that Dienne lies. I would say she believes in sources that I find not credible. She is open to believing anything that is negative about the US. Her shoes hold for evidence is very low. She shares opinions to back up her opinions. Unfortunately for her, there is a lot of real-world evidence that the rest of us see about Putin’s savagery. She thinks that anything negative about Putin is “fake news.”
Diane,
The reason dienne77 should not be cited on anything is that she blatantly ignores any evidence that contradicts whatever worldview she has and will post falsehoods constantly and attack even the most polite responders like you and Bob Shepherd.
Treating dienne77 as “credible” is like treating the National Enquirer as “credible”. I certainly hope this group of educators does not teach their students that it is fine to cite the National Enquirer as a source of information at any time that the National Enquirer happens to be saying something they believe is true.
Credibility is earned. And it is lost. You have earned credibility, which doesn’t mean you are never wrong, but does mean that you go out of your way to get it right, not to double down on what you want to be true and making personal attacks at everyone offering other evidence because making personal attacks is easier than actually making a reasonable argument as to why the evidence contradicting your facts is not valid.
dienne77 has lost credibility on everything. So have most Republicans. Anyone who can’t tell the truth about the Jan 6 insurrection deserves no credibility. But like dienne77, somehow folks believe it is okay to give Republicans who regularly offer up falsehoods the respect in which they are presented as people who should be believed when they happen not to be saying something filled with falsehoods.
Former Nation editor Katrina vanden Heuvel has credibility – even though I disagree with her point of view – because she doesn’t use falsehoods and does what normal, non-troll folks do and will criticize Putin or Trump.
dienne77, like Tulsi Gabbard, won’t criticize Putin. It isn’t because they are “deluded” into thinking that Putin is a very good man. That excuses what is their truly reprehensible condoning of violence against the families of Ukraine – including children and babies.
And they are dishonest for their own self-serving interests. There is no other explanation for why they refuse to condemn Putin’s targeting of civilians and the horrors unleashed on Ukraine. Giving them a pass and treating them as “credible” is wrong.
Katrina vanden Heuvel is credible. I disagree with most of her opinions and conclusions, but she clearly doesn’t blatantly lie to make her points.
But some folks want to “win”, not tell the truth, and they should be treated as non-credible on everything, even if, like the National Enquirer, they happen to post something that isn’t a lie that day.
As I hope educators teach their students, and as I wish journalism schools taught their students, if someone who lies a lot happens to say something true, it is absolutely wrong to use that person as a source for anything. If you believe what this constantly lying person happens to be saying this time is true, you go out and find a credible source who doesn’t lie all the time to confirm it or to quote. You don’t suddenly say this is now a credible source because one of the things this source says is true. Being credible means that one tries to be truthful, as Diane Ravitch does. it is not earned because sometimes you post something truthful and sometimes you post falsehoods, depending on what serves your purpose the most.
The irony is that while our side bends over backward to give credibility to people who don’t deserve it, the other side has destroyed the credibility of all who disagree with their right wing view.
And that is why so many folks believe the election is stolen. Those who confirm that lie are still being presented as credible folks because sometimes they also say things that isn’t full of lies.
The point is that American imperialistic adventures are justified while the imperialistic maneuvers of others are quickly identified as war crimes. If the United States committed war crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Viet Nam, for example, it is collateral damage. If Putin commits war crimes in Ukraine, it is a travesty. I fail to grasp how this line of thinking is irrational.
I agree that war crimes are war crimes and should be treated accordingly, whoever committed them.
And no one I know who is, like me, on the left side of the American political spectrum would disagree.
Well, no one whose opinions I respect.
It would be a different matter entirely if people were saying, Putin is cooking up false pretexts for a war of aggression (violent incursion into the territory of a sovereign state) and for war crimes (killing of civilians). He should be adjudged a war criminal for these violations of international law. Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and their co-conspirators cooked up a false pretext for the Second Iraq War, a war of aggression and for war crimes. They should be adjudged war criminals for these violations of international law.
But that’s not what the “but whatabout” posters here are saying. I have no idea what they are, in fact, saying, because it doesn’t make sense.
Yes and how about all the senators and representatives who voted for the illegal Iraq War? Are they war criminals?
They were lied to.
Here’s an interesting read on this subject: ex-CIA Director George Tenet’s In the Center of the Storm. He details how the Bush Maladministration manufactured false intelligence to make the claim that Iraq was developing WMDs, and this they wedded to a principle of preemptive force (the so-called “Bush Doctrine”) with only a eunuch’s shadow of justification in international law.
The point is that American imperialistic adventures are justified while the imperialistic maneuvers of others are quickly identified as war crimes. If the United States committed war crimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Viet Nam, for example, it is collateral damage. If Putin commits war crimes in Ukraine, it is a travesty. I fail to grasp how this line of thinking is irrational.
I don’t hear anyone here justifying American imperialistic adventures.
It is my fervent hope that one thing that will come out of this will be this–that the world will coalesce in its support of international law and opposition to such crimes, whoever commits them.
I have not read any comments on this blog defending America’s war in Iraq or Afghanistan or slavery or the treatment of native Americans. What are you talking about, Abigail?
Meanwhile, in Covidland:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/reported-pediatric-covid-19-deaths-plummet-24-after-cdc-fixes-coding-logic-error
Here’s what Victoria Nuland said in her testimony in front of Senate Foreign Relations Committee:
“Ukraine has biological research facilities which in fact we are quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to gain control of, so we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach,”
https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/tanzania/news/international/us-admits-there-are-biological-facilities-in-ukraine-3741878
Looks like the labs are real, Pentagon confirmed their existence later in the document.
Click to access FACT-SHEET-THE-DEPARTMENT-OF-DEFENSE’S-COOPERATIVE-THREAT-REDUCTION-PROGRAM-BIOLOGICAL-THREAT-REDUCTION-PROGRAM-ACTIVITIES-IN-UKRAINE.PDF
At this point, it’s not clear who are funding the labs, but Department of Defense is concerned over the safety of these facilities for years.
At this point, there’s no evidence that Russians are intending to attack these labs (or there are biological weapons out there). I would probably not believe that if it comes from dime-a-dozen media talking heads.
So, I think I will wait and see to get more input.
From the fact sheet this sounds like the US doing something good!
“DoD’s CTR Program began its biological work with Ukraine to reduce the risk posed by the former Soviet Union’s illegal biological weapons program, which left Soviet successor states with unsecured biological materials after the fall of the USSR. DoD’s CTR program works with many partner countries to reduce the threat that pathogens
could be misused, stolen or accidentally released. DoD even worked closely with Russia
and within Russia in laboratories owned by Russia until 2014.
DoD CTR has worked cooperatively and peacefully with the government of Ukraine to increase biosecurity and biosafety at these sites to ensure pathogens do not pose a risk to the people of Ukraine or the region. The biosafety and biosecurity capacities that DoD
has provided are in keeping with those required by the WHO IHR.
DoD CTR has maintained its relationship with Ukraine through the
present day, and Ukraine uses the laboratory improvements provided by the United States and other partners to support broader public and veterinary health goals, such as monitoring the spread of COVID-19, preparing for and controlling African Swine Fever, which helped Ukrainian farmers protect their herds from infectious diseases, and
protecting the food supply in Ukraine – just to mention a few of the many benefits that accrued from this partnership.
Scientists are encouraged to publish their research results, partner with international colleagues, and widely distribute their research and public health findings. These facilities operate in a capacity similar to state and local public health and research laboratories around the world. Furthermore, all equipment and training provided by the
United States, including from DoD, is subject to U.S. export control processes, audits, and acquisition laws and regulations to ensure transparency and compliance with both U.S. and International Health Regulations.”
MOST IMPORTANT:
“On a daily basis, Russia propagates disinformation aimed at BTRP’s laboratory and capacity building efforts in former Soviet Union countries—falsely claiming that the U.S. Department of Defense support is used to develop biological weapons. Unlike Russia, the
United States and Ukraine are not developing biological weapons and are in full compliance with the Biological Weapons Convention.”
My concern is their contractors that are not shown in the document.
Ken,
You should be a lot more concerned about the labs in Russia.
Although I have no idea why “labs” are suddenly being talked about. This is like CRT — it is a manufactured issue that suddenly became “important” when all of the previous manufactured issues that the right wing was using against public schools didn’t work. They always keep trying until they find an issue with traction. And now a lot of Americans believe that CRT is a huge issue and are glad the Republicans are passing laws to “save” our children from the evil that didn’t exist until all the previous attempts Republicans made to justify destroying public schools weren’t working.
I don’t think CRT deserved that traction and it astonishes me that there are dozens of states passing laws to control what teachers can teach and invoke protecting students against evil CRT.
And I don’t think “labs” deserves this traction — and the proof is that it only came up as an issue after all the other justifications for Putin invading Ukraine got shot down (Nazis!)
CRT only came up as an issue when all the other things that the anti-public school folks were using to demonizing public schools weren’t effective enough in getting people to hate public schools and justify the reprehensible attempts Republicans were making to destroy public schools.
“You should be a lot more concerned about the labs in Russia.”
Why? DoD has a long history of private contracting scheme, and many of these contractors are for-profit ones. Some of those turn out to be really worse like Blackwaters.
We just saw that EcoHealth Alliance funded Wuhan Lab for gain-of-function research last year. Dr. Fauci was criticized for keeping silent about it for years.
The vulnerability of labs in war zone deserves a big concern. It makes it much better when the labs are funded by the US government. I would not feel comfortable seeing the ramification on this, should it become something much better in the future.
“bigger,” not “better”
I would probably not believe that if it comes from dime-a-dozen media talking heads.
One has to listen to these people extremely critically. Many of them are simply Ken dolls and Barbie dolls with very little between their ears.
China has an extremely important decision to make. Does it wish to be an equal and lawful partner internationally, a member in good standing of the nations of the world, with normal economic relations with the entire world, or does it wish to be a rogue state and align itself with Russa’s unlawful aggression against Ukraine? Consider the vote of the UN General Assembly on this issue. Consider the statements from the International Court of Justice. It’s clear where the rest of the world stands. This could be a turning point worldwide–the time when the world comes together to say, look, we take the mission of the world body seriously and are committed to ensuring the peace and to punishing those who violate it. China is a trading partner with the entire world. It has much, much to lose by embracing the old way that is not about lawful international relations in a world at peace but about raw projection of power and endless proxy wars perhaps leading to actual wars among the mightiest states.
And OF COURSE, the US has this lesson to learn as well. It will be VERY difficult, going forward, for US politicians to make specious arguments for wars of aggression. The entire world will point to the example of Ukraine, and rightly so.
Russia has just added another war crime, under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, to the long list of crimes already committed–Article 7(1)(d): (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population. It kidnapped large numbers of citizens of Mariupol against their will and sent them to Russia, where they were dispersed around the country.
And before someone writes BUT WHATABOUT Trump’s separation of children and babies from parents at the U.S. border? I agree. Jabba the Trump and the architects of his policy, Stephen “Goebbels” Miller and Jeff Sessions, should all be tried before the International Criminal Court for their crimes in this regard. What they did was literally, under the Rome Statute, a Crime against Humanity.
I’m not a lawyer, but that’s what it looked like to me.
cx:
Russia has just added a Crime against Humanity, under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, to the long list of war crimes already committed–Article 7(1)(d): Deportation or forcible transfer of population.
The International Court of Justice has ordered Russia to cease its military operation in Ukraine. This happened yesterday. Russia is officially, now, an international scofflaw, in addition to having committed, now, many of the crimes that the court was instituted to deal with–the Crime of Aggression against the territorial integrity of another U.N. state, Crimes against Humanity in relocating Ukrainians against their will, and War Crimes in targeting civilians and using a banned weapons system–cluster bombs. The murderous and criminal undertaking continues. We need a U.N. peacekeeping force in Ukraine NOW.
Jump right in now, Dienne, and explain how the United Nations is just imagining all this.
The ICJ needs to move immediately to indict Putin. That’s not how it typically works, but it needs to send this message to the world.
In answer to a reporter’s question about why all his political opponents end up dead or imprisoned, Putin launched into a rant about how he couldn’t allow to happen in Russia the kind of thing that happened in America with the BLM protests. Yeah, no dissent in Russia. Do it there, and you go to prison for 15 years. If you lead dissent, you get poisoned in broad daylight or shot in the middle of the night. He’s a murderous, reptilian, fascist mafia boss masquerading as the leader of a country.