http://www.antiwar.com/orig/wokusch.php?articleid=5564

Who's the Real WMD Threat? 
How the Bush administration's biological weapons
buildup affects you  
by Heather Wokusch 
News that a U.S. company recently sent vials of a 1957
pandemic flu strain to laboratories across the world
by accident is only the latest outrage from the
billion-dollar boondoggle called the federal
biological weapons program. 

As you might recall, the Bush administration started
its "bio-defense" spending spree following the
September 2001 deadly anthrax attacks, and one of its
first projects was to genetically engineer a
super-resistant, even more deadly version of the
anthrax virus. 

Our leaders are nuts. 

Unfortunately, Project "Anthrax" Jefferson has good
company. A U.S. Army scientist in Maryland is
currently trying to bring back elements of the 1918
Spanish flu, a virus that killed 40 million people.
And a virologist in St. Louis has been working on a
more lethal form of mousepox (related to smallpox) �
just to try stopping the virus once it has been
created. 

Lack of oversight and runaway spending are exacerbated
by the Bush administration's disrespect for the
internationally recognized Biological Weapons
Convention. In short, reduced pressure on weapons labs
to issue declarations and allow inspections means less
accountability � and more opportunities for secrecy
and abuse. 

Put bluntly, the increasing number of stateside
bio-weapons blunders should come as no surprise. In
February 2003, for example, the University of
California at Davis (UCD) took a full 10 days to
inform nearby communities that a rhesus monkey had
escaped from its primate-breeding facility.
Coincidentally, UCD had been vying for government
funds to set up its own "hot zone" bio-defense lab
that could use primates for biological weapons
testing. If that monkey had been infected with ebola
or some other virus, it's unclear when or if the
public would have been informed. 

At roughly the same time that the monkey ditched UCD,
the Pentagon unearthed over 2,000 tons of hazardous
biological waste in Maryland, much of it undocumented
leftovers of an abandoned germ warfare program.
Nearby, the FBI was draining a pond for clues into
2001's anthrax attacks. 

Doesn't inspire much trust in the transparency of U.S.
biological weapons programs. 

And things appear only to be getting worse. 

In 2004, a whopping $6 billion went up for grabs for
federal bio-defense programs, and laboratories across
the country went ballistic trying to get their hands
on some of that cash. Predictably, cases of fraud and
abuse quickly surfaced. 

In June 2004, for example, the Army was caught
shirking inspections at a major bio-defense lab under
its domain. The scandal went back to 1999, when the
Army commissioned a biological and chemical
weapons-agent lab at Tennessee's Oak Ridge National
Laboratory. Oversight regulations obligated the Army
to inspect the lab each year thereafter, and the
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) were supposed to
have inspected the lab on a regular basis, too. 

Everything seemed to be running smoothly; in December
2003, the committee in charge of safety at the Oak
Ridge lab announced that it "remains comfortable of
the review and inspections of the Chem/Bio Facility
conducted by the CDC and the Army." 

Small problem. In 2004, the Department of Energy's
inspector general discovered that the Army actually
hadn't inspected the Oak Ridge bio-defense lab for the
previous three years, and that the CDC hadn't been
there for four years. Yet the lab's safety committee
said it was "comfortable" with the imaginary
inspections. 

Also in 2004, a military bio-defense contractor called
Southern Research landed in hot water by accidentally
sending live anthrax across the country from
Frederick, Md., to the Children's Hospital of Oakland
(Calif.). To make matters worse, it turns out that
Southern Research's lab in Maryland didn't even
maintain the institutional bio-safety committee
required by federal research rules. The punishment for
these acts of gross incompetence and irresponsibility?
The Bush administration gave Southern Research the
task of safeguarding a new $30 million biological
weapons facility being built near Chicago. 

In September of the same year, three lab workers at
the Boston University Medical Center were accidentally
exposed to a potentially lethal bio-warfare agent
called tularemia bacterium. The lab didn't report the
tularemia infections until two months later, though �
after it had won a contract to build a new, $178
million bio-defense laboratory. 

Concerns about lack of transparency and monetary waste
aside, the administration's bio-weapons buildup raises
obvious ethical problems. Why should the U.S. create
newer, even deadlier viruses? Who are these
catastrophic weapons going to be tested on? What
populations will they ultimately be used against? 

These questions take on urgent meaning given the Bush
administration's military adventurism coupled with the
U.S. media's poor coverage regarding war victims. For
example, eyewitnesses to the late-2004 attack on
Fallujah claimed that U.S. forces used poisonous
gases, and "weird" bombs that exploded into fires that
burned the skin despite water being thrown on the
burns � a telltale sign of napalm or phosphorus bombs.


UK reaction to the revelation was swift and strong,
with demands that Prime Minister Blair remove British
troops from Iraq until the U.S. ceased from using such
savage weaponry. Labour MP Alice Mahon demanded that
Blair make "an emergency statement to the Commons to
explain why this is happening. It begs the question:
'Did we know about this hideous weapon's use in
Iraq?'" 

No similar outrage in Congress. In fact, no comment at
all. The U.S. mainstream media didn't cover the "weird
bomb" allegations. 

But it doesn't take a genius to put two-and-two
together: if we permit our government to ignore
international weapons-control conventions and then say
nothing while fresh billions are invested in barbaric
new weaponry, we lose the right to act surprised when
our own military uses that weaponry on innocent
civilians abroad.

Or even on us. 

You may be surprised to learn that in 2003, the
Pentagon quietly admitted to having used
biological/chemical agents on 5,842 service members in
secret tests conducted over a decade (1962-73). 

In operations called Project 112 and Project SHAD, the
Defense Department tested its own weapons on service
members aboard Navy ships, and in all sorts of other
nasty ways � such as spraying a Hawaiian rainforest
and parts of Oahu. All in all, tests were conducted in
six states (Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii,
Maryland, Utah) as well as in Canada and Britain. 

Many military personnel were not informed when the
toxic agents were being tested on them. Only decades
later, as crucial documents slowly become
declassified, have the veterans' health complaints
been acknowledged.

You might think such barbarism could never happen
again: too many legal protections for citizens in
place. Think again. 

There's a tricky clause in Chapter 32/Title 50 of the
United States Code (the aggregation of U.S. general
and permanent laws) that states that the Secretary of
Defense can conduct a chemical or biological agent
test or experiment on humans in certain cases "if
informed consent has been obtained." 

So far, so good. But check out a different part of
Chapter 32, Section 1515, entitled "Suspension;
Presidential authorization":

"After November 19, 1969, the operation of this
chapter, or any portion thereof, may be suspended by
the President during the period of any war declared by
Congress and during the period of any national
emergency declared by Congress or by the President."

You got it. If the president or Congress decides we're
at war, then the secretary of defense doesn't need
anybody's consent to test chemical or biological
agents on human beings. Gives one pause during these
days of a perpetual "War on Terror." 

In January 2005, U.S. Senate majority leader Bill
Frist called for a new Manhattan Project (referring to
the WWII-era nuclear weapons bonanza) for biological
weapons. Frist told an audience at the World Economic
Forum, "The greatest existential threat we have in the
world today is biological," and he went on to predict
a bio-warfare attack "at some time in the next 10
years." 

How ironic that while Frist cited the 2001 U.S.
anthrax attacks as proof more biological weapons
research was necessary, he failed to mention that
those incidents involved anthrax produced right in the
good ol' USA � or that the primary suspect in the
attacks was a U.S. Army scientist. Frist also didn't
clarify how developing even more biological warfare
agents would make the world safer. 

The original Manhattan Project ultimately led to U.S.
forces dropping atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
with the resulting slaughter of hundreds of thousands
of people. It's terrifying to consider the potential
repercussions, both domestic and abroad, of the Bush
administration's coveted new biological-weapons
Manhattan Project.
 



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Would you Help a Child in need?
It is easier than you think.
Click Here to meet a Child you can help.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/0Z9NuA/I_qJAA/i1hLAA/TXWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 


***************************************************************************
{Invite (mankind, O Muhammad ) to the Way of your Lord (i.e. Islam) with wisdom 
(i.e. with the Divine Inspiration and the Qur'an) and fair preaching, and argue 
with them in a way that is better. Truly, your Lord knows best who has gone 
astray from His Path, and He is the Best Aware of those who are guided.} 
(Holy Quran-16:125)

{And who is better in speech than he who [says: "My Lord is Allah (believes in 
His Oneness)," and then stands straight (acts upon His Order), and] invites 
(men) to Allah's (Islamic Monotheism), and does righteous deeds, and says: "I 
am one of the Muslims."} (Holy Quran-41:33)
 
The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "By Allah, if 
Allah guides one person by you, it is better for you than the best types of 
camels." [al-Bukhaaree, Muslim] 

The prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)  also said, "Whoever 
calls to guidance will have a reward similar to the reward of the one who 
follows him, without the reward of either of them being lessened at all." 
[Muslim, Ahmad, Aboo Daawood, an-Nasaa'ee, at-Tirmidhee, Ibn Maajah] 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

All views expressed herein belong to the individuals concerned and do not in 
any way reflect the official views of IslamCity unless sanctioned or approved 
otherwise. 

If your mailbox clogged with mails from IslamCity, you may wish to get a daily 
digest of emails by logging-on to http://www.yahoogroups.com to change your 
mail delivery settings or email the moderators at [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the 
title "change to daily digest".  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/islamcity/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to