US Army Seeks Anthrax

[Kowalski]

It was reported in the 'New Scientist, 24-September weekly edition, that the US Army is wanting to buy 'large quatities of Anthrax. It is reported that a number of contracts have been 'uncovered' which relate to the Dugway Testing grounds in Utah. The tenders put out are said to be for the non-virulent strain of Anthrax, and for equipment to make large volumes of other biological agents.

It is not known why the US Army requires biological agents, but testing of delivery systems for such agents cannot be ruled out. Considering that the US allegedly gave up biological weapons in 1969, small quatities of lethal Anthrax were still being produced at Dugway as late as 1998. Why ?

Considering that removing WMD, primarily Biological and Chemical weaponry was a prime reason for invading Iraq, does anyone else see this as a supreme irony on the part of the US Army, and presumebly the US Gov?

I might add that the report stated that a spokesperson at Dugway refused to comment re said Anthrax and why it was required.

Cheers

K

 

[robtex]

Reported by who? You got a link?

 

[Kowalski]

See if the New Scientist Mag is online, I read this in the 24 Sept, UK issue, althought it is also available in the USA. Reporter is David Hambling.

Cheers

K

 

[Kowalski]

Here's your Link:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18725184.800.html

K

 

[michel]

There are quite a few links to the story........this is sad.

 

[Ryan2065]

It was reported in the 'New Scientist, 24-September weekly edition, that the US Army is wanting to buy 'large quatities of Anthrax. It is reported that a number of contracts have been 'uncovered' which relate to the Dugway Testing grounds in Utah. The tenders put out are said to be for the non-virulent strain of Anthrax, and for equipment to make large volumes of other biological agents.

So they are trying to buy non-virulent Anthrax... Your point? Ever hear of testing so you will be prepard for an anthrax attack?

It is not known why the US Army requires biological agents, but testing of delivery systems for such agents cannot be ruled out. Considering that the US allegedly gave up biological weapons in 1969, small quatities of lethal Anthrax were still being produced at Dugway as late as 1998. Why ?

I like how it is left off if they were making the virulent or non virulent strands...

Considering that removing WMD, primarily Biological and Chemical weaponry was a prime reason for invading Iraq, does anyone else see this as a supreme irony on the part of the US Army, and presumebly the US Gov?

I might add that the report stated that a spokesperson at Dugway refused to comment re said Anthrax and why it was required.

So is the United States supposed to tell newspaper people everything they do?

All in all... if the United States started using chemical weapons this would be looked down upon by the world just as much as using a nuke. So why would we go looking for chemical weapons when we could just as easily get a nuke and bomb someone?

Or are you trying to suggest that the United States government practices terrorism themselves? You seem to like to bash the United States every chance you get...

 

[Kowalski]

Ah, Mr Right Wing,

And you seem prepared to stand up for anything which involves hurting people ? I think it says clearly enough' lethal Anthrax' What do think they want it for, Medical research, oh please, where does your naivity end ? If you can't see the irony in buying Anthrax, and the equipment for producing large amounts of biological agents, and trying to justify a war over the very same agents, then you need to change your glasses.

Cheers

K

 

[Ryan2065]

And you seem prepared to stand up for anything which involves hurting people ? I think it says clearly enough' lethal Anthrax' What do think they want it for, Medical research, oh please, where does your naivity end ?

Oh i missed that lethal part, my bad. But anyways, so you are basically saying that because the United States made small quantities of anthrax, that they obviously are using it to kill people? So by your logic... Any doctor who tries to get a disease should not be allowed to do this... Because, you know, he is obviously going to kill people with it! (Yea, its not like the United States needs a viral strand of anthrax to study or anything.. we have esp here.)

If you can't see the irony in buying Anthrax, and the equipment for producing large amounts of biological agents, and trying to justify a war over the very same agents, then you need to change your glasses.

We went to war over people getting anthrax? As far as I know like less than 10 people died from anthrax in the past 5 years. Please get your story straight. We went over there for oil.

How could anyone even possibly believe that the United States would want to produce large amounts of a biological weapon? Remember, we have nukes, enough to blow up the world 3 times. Even the united states is not dumb enough to realize that if they use bioengineered weapons the whole world would be against them, even so far as to want to go to war with the US. If it ever gets that far we can nuke whoever we need to. We don't need bioenginnered weapons, but seeing as our enemies have them, we might want to know more about them.

To jump to the conclusion that the United States is going to mass produce bio-engineered weapons is pretty insane and shows you put absolutely no thought into your argument before bashing the US.

 

[Kowalski]

Oh i missed that lethal part, my bad. But anyways, so you are basically saying that because the United States made small quantities of anthrax, that they obviously are using it to kill people? So by your logic... Any doctor who tries to get a disease should not be allowed to do this... Because, you know, he is obviously going to kill people with it! (Yea, its not like the United States needs a viral strand of anthrax to study or anything.. we have esp here.)

We went to war over people getting anthrax? As far as I know like less than 10 people died from anthrax in the past 5 years. Please get your story straight. We went over there for oil.

How could anyone even possibly believe that the United States would want to produce large amounts of a biological weapon? Remember, we have nukes, enough to blow up the world 3 times. Even the united states is not dumb enough to realize that if they use bioengineered weapons the whole world would be against them, even so far as to want to go to war with the US. If it ever gets that far we can nuke whoever we need to. We don't need bioenginnered weapons, but seeing as our enemies have them, we might want to know more about them.

To jump to the conclusion that the United States is going to mass produce bio-engineered weapons is pretty insane and shows you put absolutely no thought into your argument before bashing the US.

I know we went there for Oil, but that wasn't how Bush and Blair justified the invasion. They justified it as well you know, by claiming a dangerous dictator was developing biological and chemical weapons, a claim later found wanting.

That's got little to do with this latest development, apart from irony. No, the Gov doesn't have to tell the people want it's doing in the name of the people, nonetheless, I,and many others believe that there is more than a hint that the USA is going to commence a new biological warfare programme. There's not much to you need to know about Anthrax, it kills people stone dead. What maybe of interest is finding a more effective means of delivering it to whoever the enemy maybe. The UK is not clean regarding bio-weapons either I might add.

Cheers

K

 

[Ryan2065]

That's got little to do with this latest development, apart from irony. No, the Gov doesn't have to tell the people want it's doing in the name of the people, nonetheless, I,and many others believe that there is more than a hint that the USA is going to commence a new biological warfare programme. There's not much to you need to know about Anthrax, it kills people stone dead. What maybe of interest is finding a more effective means of delivering it to whoever the enemy maybe. The UK is not clean regarding bio-weapons either I might add.

Anthrax is not the most effective bio weapon... It kills people but there are way better weapons to use. Small pox, for one would be the best bio weapon. Terrorists use anthrax because it isn't that hard to get their hands on, and it is easy to make when you have the right equipment. The united states has the means to make small pox if they want to... Why would we use cheaper bio weapons when we could do way more damage with stronger stuff?

I am sorry, but I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories. And this is all that this is... A silly conspiracy theory. You hear that the united states bought anthrax. The non-lethal kind. So you immediatly assume that the united states will use it to create things to kill people. I find I keep asking you... Why are you so down on the United States that you would jump to that conclusion?

 

[Kowalski]

I'm simply reporting what a Reputable Science Magizine wrote, and that is enough cause for concern.

Alan Pearson, Programme director for Biological and Chemical Weapons at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington DC said, and I quote: " If one can grow the Sterme strain (non-lethal) in these units, one could grow the Ames strain, which is quite lethal". You have to ask how this is going to look to other nations, and what would happen to the Biological Weapons convention if other nations followed the United States lead ?

 

[The Black Whirlwind]

well, bio weapons would be useful is you just wanted to wipe out a people, without permaently harming the land, like what would happen with a nuke. the epidemic would spread quickly, and kill everyone, without land damage. then we could just go in and disinfect the area. this wouldn't matter, however, if we didn't want the land we are attacking.

 

[drekmed]

How could anyone even possibly believe that the United States would want to produce large amounts of a biological weapon? Remember, we have nukes, enough to blow up the world 3 times. Even the united states is not dumb enough to realize that if they use bioengineered weapons the whole world would be against them, even so far as to want to go to war with the US. If it ever gets that far we can nuke whoever we need to. We don't need bioenginnered weapons, but seeing as our enemies have them, we might want to know more about them.

like thejedi said, chemical and bio weapons are a very "clean" form of weapon. they only cause death and not destruction. after the deaths, all you need to do is send in the people to clean up the bodies and make sure the weapon is no longer active, and you have all the infrastructure to take control of.

this next bit is a little conspiratorial. if anthrax, what is considered the terrorists bio-weapon of choice, were to be released by the the government into the subway system in a major city, it would cause panic, and if a bad enough incident occured, it would allow the president to declare martial law and effectively take over that city. if this were to happen in many cities across the US at the same time, the president might then be inclined to declare a state of nationwide martial law. this would remove authority of local elected officials, curfews could be established, and we would become a military state. this could all be done with only minor loss of life. only make a small amount of deadly anthrax,and large amounts of the nonlethal stuff, will still make a lot of people sick. all the president would then have to do is state the truth. it could go something like this:

'there has been a massive attack on the nation by a currently unknown number attackers. they intend to instill fear in the public but i can assure you that you'll be safe from this point on. the fact that such a massive incident occured without warning from your local government officials shows their inability to properly protect you from such attacks. for this reason i am declaring marital law in all of the major cities around our country and their surrounding areas. i will also be implementing new legislation to ensure that the people of this country will remain secure in the future.'

this is all that would need to be said initially, and it would technically be the truth due to vague language. if done quickly after a widespread attack, the presidents approval rating could skyrocket at first. especially if they were to give some type of advanced warning of such an attack about a day prior.

also i noted that they were purchasing both 3000 litre and 1500 litre drums to grow this stuff. even if they only puchase 1 of each, that is a massive amount of bio-agent since you can successfully freeze anthrax to increase its shelf-life.

Drekmed

disclaimer: the scenario in this is hypothetical in nature. it is not intended as an assault on the president or the government, and, as far as i know, not actually what is happening at the moment. im just saying that while it is highly unlikely to happen, it is still a possibility. hell, i thought of it, im sure someone else already has, and i wouldn't put it past some people to actually think it is a good idea. some people are really sick like that.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

No, the Gov doesn't have to tell the people want it's doing in the name of the people, nonetheless, I,and many others believe that there is more than a hint that the USA is going to commence a new biological warfare programme.

It's called 'malicious egocentrism'. No offense, but when there seem to be so many legitimate reasons to be concerned about US policy, I find this eagerness on the part of some to believe these totally inane conspiracy theories sad.

 

[Ryan2065]

well, bio weapons would be useful is you just wanted to wipe out a people, without permaently harming the land, like what would happen with a nuke. the epidemic would spread quickly, and kill everyone, without land damage. then we could just go in and disinfect the area. this wouldn't matter, however, if we didn't want the land we are attacking.

Yes, because other nations would not be against us using chemical weapons... Again, if the US does not have the backing of the other major super powers, the US would be taken down if it used chemical weapons. At least there would be a major threat of a war and I believe monkeys will fly out of the presidents butt before he risks starting a global war... Thats Germany's job =P

 

[Apotheosis]

Not a big surprise, I'm not sure if this specific case is true or not, but like I said I wouldnt be surprised. As far as the US getting taken down, I really dont see it happeningin a war. No one can beat the US in a war, even if the US was losing we have enough nukes that one hair-brained President could blow the world up. Politicians are not as stupid as people say, they realize that if the world is blown up they wont have anyone to boss around Not saying that we couldnt be beat militarily, just that even if we lost we could take everyone down with us. Repercussions would likely come in very heavy economic tariffs, restrictions etc..

 

[The Black Whirlwind]

i wonder what it will be like when the pledge is changed to "one world, under god"...

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It is a widespread belief over here that The USA has never signed the Chemical and Biological arms treaty.
If that is true, there is nothing to stop them producing and useing these weapons.

However be warned the Island used by England, for research during the first world war, for tests on anthax is still active and highly dangerous.
So are graves infected in the middle ages ( protective gear is always worn to test them before they are opened.)

Terry_______________________-
Blessed are those who bring peace, they shall be children of God

 

[michel]

It is a widespread belief over here that The USA has never signed the Chemical and Biological arms treaty.
If that is true, there is nothing to stop them producing and useing these weapons.

However be warned the Island used by England, for research during the first world war, for tests on anthax is still active and highly dangerous.
So are graves infected in the middle ages ( protective gear is always worn to test them before they are opened.)

Terry_______________________-
Blessed are those who bring peace, they shall be children of God

A very Good point Terry; people do not learn by other's mistakes, unfortunately.

chemical and bio weapons are a very "clean" form of weapon. they only cause death and not destruction. after the deaths, all you need to do is send in the people to clean up the bodies and make sure the weapon is no longer active, and you have all the infrastructure to take control of.

Oh, I am so glad you consider them to be 'Clean'; souds delightful to me, you can invade a country and preserve all their infrastructure - now that is what I call civilized!:banghead3

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Not saying that we couldnt be beat militarily, just that even if we lost we could take everyone down with us.

This is a moral attitude...?
One that your enemies couldn't use...?

Terry____________________
Blessed are those who bring peace, they shall be children of God