A few days ago the Daily Mail busted out an “exclusive” story, claiming that Russian “disinformation” on NATO-funded biolabs in Ukraine might be accurate after all:
Hunter Biden DID help secure millions in funding for US contractor in Ukraine specializing in deadly pathogen research, laptop emails reveal, raising more questions about the disgraced son of then vice president
The same story was picked up by the New York Post, who broke the original “Hunter’s laptop” story back in 2020.
This is one of those validating headlines we in alt media tend to rush in and grab without pausing to think about context. We KNEW we were right, and look – the Daily Mail is admitting it so it must be true.
But, let’s not do that. Let’s be smart and take stock before we snatch up this morsel, and consider what we have here.
One major point to note: This is the DAILY MAIL. The fat, corrupt heart of the MSM.
They don’t feel obliged to publish leaked stuff just because it’s undeniably true. They deny the undeniable every single day at the same time they tell massive indefensible lies.
No. If a ‘leak’ appears here it is with the express approval or requirement of at least some part of the UK/US establishment.
So, right there, we know we are reading this story from this source at this time because someone in the Establishment wants us to.
Which begs the question – why does the UK/US establishment want us to read a ton of files in the DM that SUPPORT the Russian claims of US-run biological warfare research in Ukraine?
It’s curious, isn’t it?
Almost as curious as Victoria Nuland “admitting” the labs were there in the first place:
Please do not try to earnestly counter this by saying there’s independent evidence the labs exist. Yes, there is. But why do you think that’s a factor for Nuland?
Nuland cares about evidence even less than the Daily Mail does. To her veridical truth is a minor inconvenience she encounters now and again and instantly brushes aside. She ‘admits’ what she admits for one reason. It suits her agenda to do so.
Another point to consider: Hunter Biden’s laptop used to be censored on social media
“Hunter Biden’s laptop” has been a leaky treasure trove of variously planted narratives for some time. We KNOW it’s a handy tool being wielded by – again – at least some actors in the UK/UK nexus. You want a story of sleaze or villainy out there – good place to source it is somewhere on Hunter Biden’s HDD. Because he is, unquestionably, a gross little crown prince of sleaze.
And interestingly, when the sleaze being uncovered is not politically convenient, it is subject to immediate and sweeping removal on social media. When the laptop story was first broken in the run-up to the 2020 election, both Twitter and Facebook banned all mention of the story from their platforms. Twitter even went so far as to suspend the account of the official White House Spokesperson for tweeting about it.
Nothing like that is happening on this round of laptop stories.
In fact articles in both Vox and the New York Times have quasi-admitted the laptop is genuine after labelling it misinformation for the last 18 months. Curious.
Essentially, there are three points to remember here:
- The Daily Mail is not honor-bound to print “leaks” just because they’re true. They lie and repress the truth all the time.
- Victoria Nuland had no reason at all to admit those labs exist, she lies all the time and could have lied about that if she wanted.
- Previous “Hunter’s laptop” stories were blocked on social media for being “misinformation”, this one was not.
Whether the laptop story is true, partly true or totally false, the fact we are seeing it is clearly an establishment contrivance.
Yet another strong indicator that those “bio labs” are a narrative that it very much suits both the West and Russia to promote.
As to possible reasons why – well it’s quite obvious how this story can be made to tie into the currently semi-dormant, but not dead, “pandemic” narrative. Particularly when we note that Russia was at pains to make it clear at least one of these labs was allegedly working on – of course – coronaviruses.
Let’s remember that from the outset the most essential thrust of the pandemic fear story was to force us to accept a) the virus was NEW and UNIQUE and b) PEOPLE NEEDED TO BE PROTECTED FROM IT.
The agenda-managers clearly did not mind about details as long as this central myth was accepted. They did not mind whether people thought it was a natural mutation or something bio-engineered. Just as long as people were afraid of it and believed ‘something must be done’ the agenda was being served.
And the pandemic narrative began to collapse when enough people saw the lie of it and refused to be afraid.
So, reinventing or reissuing the story as being about a pathogen from a terrifying Ukrainian bio-lab might be a good way to scythe through that growing awakening, no?
Another possible reason, of course, is future horror stories of mutant pathogens being released ‘by accident’ or ‘by the Russians/Ukrainians’ (you will be able to pick a side in that delicious binary and debate it forever in the ensuing lockdown/cull, which will, of course, be global and require a ton of even tighter legislation).
Such stories can also be a great ‘justification’ for widening a war or reviving a flagging war narrative, for dropping peace negotiations, cranking up sanctions or any other chaos-inducing stuff you want to introduce.
So, given the source and the huge potential this story has for promoting the ‘forever pandemic’, ‘bio-warfare’ and probably other agendas too, let’s approach with caution so we don’t end up doing the propagandists’ work for them.
Caveat emptor is the order of the day.