Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Sick to Death of Trusting Bush

By Terry J. Allen, In These Times. Posted September 8, 2006.


Bush lied about Iraq's WMDs, his tactics in the 'war on terror' and his domestic spying program. Now he wants us to trust him that it's safe to make weapons out of the world's deadliest diseases.
Advertisement

Trust me, George Bush says, perched on the remains of Geneva Conventions, the Constitution and habeas corpus.

From this moral high ground, the United States is assuring the world that a new facility for researching a horror shop of weaponized infectious diseases will be used purely for defensive purposes. The National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center’s (NBACC) $128 million, 160,000-square-foot facility is under construction at Fort Detrick, Md. There, the United States has already weaponized more than a dozen diseases -- including anthrax, plague, botulism and ebola -- and bioengineered war-friendly “improvements.” Scientists are also using DNA-synthesizing techniques to fabricate genetically altered or man-made viruses, and to study the feasibility of creating germ weapons targeting particular ethnicities.

“De facto, we are going to make biowarfare pathogens at NBACC in order to study them,” Penrose Albright, former assistant Homeland Security secretary for science and technology, told the Washington Post.

The 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention made it illegal under international and U.S. law to make or stockpile bacteriological or viral organisms for use as weapons. The United States is exploiting a loophole: The treaty allows nations to develop small amounts of biological warfare agents for defensive research.

That, according to a NBACC Power Point presentation, briefly posted on the Internet and quickly removed, is what the Fort Detrick lab does -- in secret and without meaningful monitoring. The profound secrecy that surrounds the project, as well as CIA and intelligence involvement, raises alarms; these are ratcheted up to red alert in light of the Bush administration’s track record of violating international treaties and lying to the public. And then there is Congress’ history of defining “oversight” as a failure to notice rather than a duty to oversee.

According to the Department of Defense, the secrecy surrounding the Fort Detrick expansion is necessary for national security. The interests of the public, administration officials argue (as they did to defend NSA spying), would be compromised by legislative and judicial meddling -- a.k.a. the constitutionally mandated balance of powers.

Odds are the Fort Detrick research exceeds the purely defensive, rendering the CBW treaty as quaint as the Geneva Conventions barring torture. But even if the research conformed to law, what nation would believe that the United States abides by treaty obligations that limit its “war on terror”?

The possibilities for disaster are plentiful. By undermining the treaty, the United States greenlights other nations and groups to similarly “defend” themselves. And compared with making and delivering nukes, creating and distributing biowarfare agents is dead simple. A competent scientist with a good lab can cook up enough to sicken and kill thousands, perhaps millions.

Second, the lesson taught by recent dealings with Iran and North Korea is that possession of weapons of mass destruction tends to inoculate against U.S. attack. Secret expansion of U.S. bioterrorism research -- without monitoring through the CBW treaty -- could spark a bioarms race.

And then there is the risk of accident. On its Web site, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a lead government agency on bioterrorism, asks: “Has there ever been an accident at a BSL-3 or BSL-4 facility?” (Bio Safety Level-4 labs hold the most dangerous infectious agents.)

NIAD cheerily answers: “No,” although “Rare accidents such as needlesticks may cause exposure of laboratory staff,” but not “to other workers or to the community.”

But according to the Council for Responsible Genetics, “mistakes happen.” Fort Detrick and other Level-3 and -4 facilities have had a number of accidents, including the loss of ebola and anthrax samples; exposure of workers to anthrax; a three hour power failure that compromised containment and led workers (you’re going to love this) to seal the windows with duct tape; a leaking test chamber that infected workers with tuberculosis; a researcher who contracted the ebola-like sabia virus and exposed 75 other workers; and two researchers infected with HIV from defective gloves. And, last but not least, don’t forget that the anthrax spores used in the September 2001 mail attacks traced back to Fort Detrick.

NIAD is equally noncommittal about the safety of shipping bio agents to and from labs: “There are specific Government regulations for transportation of infectious materials. Infectious materials are safely transported worldwide on a daily basis under these regulations.” Feel better? Perhaps you didn’t hear that in 2003 a package containing West Nile virus samples exploded and exposed workers at the Columbus airport.

And then there is the insanity of trusting critical scientific decisions to an administration that gives equal weight to the theory of evolution and the fable of creationism, that undermines stem cell research by confusing a zygote with an infant, and that is waiting until it has to govern in scuba gear before acknowledging global warming.

Trust me, indeed.

Digg!

Terry J. Allen is a senior editor of In These Times. Her work has appeared in Harper's, The Nation, New Scientist and other publications.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
ASAP
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 8, 2006 1:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bushies have discovered a new way of conquoring the rest of the world: depopulate it. This new barbarism must be stopped ASAP.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ASAP Posted by: symcokid
» RE: ASAP--more ways,,, Posted by: John Rice
» RE: ASAP--more ways,,, Posted by: symcokid
» RE: ASAP--more ways,,, Posted by: bullwhip7
» RE: ASAP Posted by: Joe the Poe
Trust?
Posted by: Tom Degan on Sep 8, 2006 2:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow! It's been a long time since I'ver heard the words "trust" and "George W. Bush" uttered in the same sentence". Quite frankly, it's a tad unnerving.

Ten years from now, when George W. Bush, the First Fool, is languishing in federal prison, all of us will be looking back at film, video, photos and audio recordings of this corrupt, hideous, half-witted frat boy and we'll all be asking the same question: "My goodness! Just what were we thinking?

We'll look back at that disgusting "Beevis and Buthead" giggle of his. We'll watch un-edited press conferences and interviews, when he was forced to speak extemporaniously and ponder his deplorably mangled syntax. We'll see that hideous smirk he gets whenever someone (good old David Gregory!) asks him a question that he doesn't like. With benefit of hindsight we will re-read transcripts of campaign speeches ("Uniter. Not a divider" "Humble foreign policy") We'll look back at all of these things and, hopefully, we'll all hang our heads in shame. Wishful thinking, I know, but it's not unreasonable to hope for a mass mea culpa.

Did you ever think that your once-great country would sink this low? And now he's scrambling all over the country, desperately trying to scare the bleeding mortal shit out of the American people. And alot of them are swallowing this chickenshit and calling it "chicken salad". Watch the two or three weeks leading up to the November election. The "terror alert level" will go into the clouds - particularly in the so called "blue states".

In the next two months, the real character of this fucking nightmare of an administration we'll be revealed for all to see. Even the most partisan republican we'll feel shame and embarrassment defending them. The grand old party is over, kids! And thand to the miracle of modern technology, you and I will have a front row seat for the festivities! Watching these dispicable bastards go crashing down in flames and utter defeat and destruction will be the greatest moment of my life. I'm positively giddy!

Pray for peace.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Trust? Posted by: owleyes
» RE: Trust? Owl Eyes Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Trust Posted by: Maryanne
Oh and by the way....
Posted by: Tom Degan on Sep 8, 2006 2:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I got so carried away with what I was saying that I forgot what my main point of emphasis was supposed to be (These guys just get me crazy!)

Trust George W. Bush with biological weapons???

Oh what a grand idea! The most muderous administration in American history! Oh, please! I can't stand it! This is just too funny to be believable!

Tom Degan
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh and by the way.... Posted by: Mary Eman
» RE: Oh and by the way.... Posted by: domenico234
» RE: Oh and by the way.... Posted by: Maryanne
» RE: Oh and by the way.... Posted by: bullwhip7
» For the love of... Posted by: Joe the Poe
Did we learn NOTHING from the Cold War?
Posted by: Lizmv on Sep 8, 2006 3:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The US already holds the Earth's largest arsonal of nuclear weapons, with the capability of destroying all life on the planet. Now biological weapons? Aren't these people able to understand that if 'we' have them, then 'they' will also feel the need to have them, also? And if 'they' have them, 'we' need more and better than 'them'? So we end up in another arms race. Sooner or later, all the weapons of mass destruction WILL be used.

And didn't George Bush say that "Free nations don't make weapons of mass destruction!"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't read: "The Architect: Karl Rove and The Master Plan
Posted by: kirkmuse on Sep 8, 2006 3:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For those who support George W. Bush and his policies,
I strongly suggest that they not read the recently published
book: "THE ARCHITECT: Karl Rove and The Master Plan For
Absolute Power by James Moore and Wayne Slater (the same
authors who wrote "BUSH'S BRAIN").

Bush's supporters will not want to read that his closest political advisor and personal friend, Karl Rove, had a very close personal relationship with his openly gay Stepfather.

And Bush's supporters will not want to read that Rove is an avowed agnostic and non-Christian.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

fruitcrow
Posted by: fruitcrow on Sep 8, 2006 4:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe another nation, following the Bush doctrine of preemptive war, should invade us as we are manufacturing WMDs...How can we ask Iran to stop their nuclear program, when we are engaged in such endeavors?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: fruitcrow - right on. Posted by: symcokid
Didn't we learn anything from the African bees?
Posted by: Lauren on Sep 8, 2006 4:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd like $128 million and a 160,000-square-foot facility in the Bay Area for medical marijuana research please. Cannabis shows some promise regarding curing cancer and is certianly useful for treating alcoholism, nicotine addiction and a whole host of other diseases and disorders. Could we please re-examine our moral priorities?

Believe it or not, nanotechnology is even scarier. It could destroy all life on earth, not just that of all humans or all vertibrates. I hear the Japanese have a research center for nanotech way down in S'America; I guess they figure that is safely far away enough from them. Don't count on it, buddies.

The problem the US is having is we are competing with the Evil Ones. We have to keep inventing new tortures, new craziness to be competitive. Why? I have no idea. Look at what we do in Columbia, what does our 'carbon footprint' look like there?

I have been ranting for a long time about the corruption and ignorance of our leaders. I thought Gore lost his election because seeing the evil he was running against was just too much, it was obscured to him. He could not imagine, nor stoop to, their level and tactics so he was blindsided. We all were. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. I assume Gore, much older and wiser now, wouldn't be so easily fooled again.

Our big problem is the machine he could not beat then, is holding even more power now. It has enough of both parties to run everything. What we have now is a united government for war, for killing people. The Bush administration has actually been teriffically effective if you see the long term goal was to kill us all. Nearly all his policies run in that direction.

Who wants that? Not me!

(Name one Bush policy or achievement that was good for the American people. I dare you. Oh, I remember, we all got a $600 check for hush money.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHY DID YOU TRUST BUSH IN THE FIRST PLACE ?
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Sep 8, 2006 7:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whenever I see an approval rating of 34% I wonder who those people are. Do they really believe what they hear and see ? I'm not sure that it's about trust. It's about doing what we are told to do and not questioning anyone or anything. That's not trust it's stupidity. But it is easier. Authority thrives in a land of sheep. It's important to continue asking qestions and demanding answers. It's not about trust.
Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Stop wondering, I'm here already. Posted by: Joe the Poe
Google: NBACC Power Point presentation, get something else interesting
Posted by: obmit83 on Sep 8, 2006 8:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.ipam.ucla.edu/publications/
gss2005/gss2005_5484.pdf#search=
%22NBACC%20PowerPoint%20presentation%22

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is the War on Terror Bogus?
Posted by: rwa on Sep 8, 2006 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
QUESTIONS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL MEDIA:
"On the 10th of August the British police claimed they had foiled a terrorist plot to bring down as many as 10 planes travelling from the UK to the US; another plot in the ongoing War on Terror. Previous to this we had the Forest Gate incident, where police shot a 23 year old postal worker, whilst searching for a “chemical vest”. Then there was the erroneously named “ricin plot”. There was no ricin and no plot. The “suspects” in this plot were very quietly, cleared and released. The tragic events of 7/7 leave many questions unanswered as our leaders refuse calls for an independent public inquiry. The official story of 9/11 has been taken apart by many academics and journalists alike; although you need to be neither to identify the inconsistencies, half truths and lies in this version.

In the most recent episode, Paul Stephenson, deputy chief of the Metropolitan Police in London, left us in no doubt, declaring that the apprehended suspects had intended to cause “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.” More than once, Home Secretary Dr. John Reid informed us of the likelihood of an immediate strike. Franco Frattini, the European Union’s security commissioner told the New York Times “The plotters received a very short message to ‘Go now’.” He had been briefed by Dr. Reid. “I was convinced by British authorities that this message exists”, he said. The security threat was raised to its highest level, “critical”, signalling an imminent terrorist attack. The urgency of the situation was conveyed to us in this manner, news report after news report, from every corner of the mainstream media.

To date 25 people have been arrested, with 17 charged. None of the suspects had made a bomb, none had airline tickets and only some had passports. I would have thought that if a group of people intended to bomb 10 airliners out of the sky, there are certain basic things they would need to do this: Bombs, airline tickets and passports. No fair minded jury would be able to convict these people. No doubt, with this in mind, Prosecutor Colin Gibbs told the Central Criminal Court that there would be no trial before January 2008. Why such a long time before the trial? The cynics amongst us would say it is because of the absence of any credible evidence. By 2008 these suspects will be long forgotten by the British public.

But the war on terror goes on. We are given regular updates regarding the level of the threat we face. The latest by Peter Clarke, Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, stated that MI5 and the police are monitoring thousands of Muslims suspected of being terrorists or their supporters. Given the previous false claims, it’s remarkable that a statement like this isn’t subject to the most rigorous scrutiny. Far from this, the servile media repeats these claims over and over again, branding them into the minds of the public.
Journalists and political activists in the Anti-War movement have failed to fill the chasm left by the mainstream media. They acknowledge that the Government lied over Iraq, bringing us the Anthrax plot, yellow cake from Niger, 45 minutes from WMD attack and so on. Yet they accept the basic premise for the war on terror; that there are groups of Muslim terrorists, albeit legitimately disaffected, living amongst us. Apparently, they fail to see that it was 9/11 which acted as the launch pad for the Neocons pre-existing plans to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. Surely it is the War on Terror that maintains the climate necessary for the US/UK alliance to pursue its goals for the Middle East and beyond. Shouldn’t the Anti-War movement take on board the possibility that the people who lied to us over Iraq are lying to us over the War on Terror? "

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Is the War on Terror Bogus? Posted by: george233
» The main problem in a word Posted by: medbear
» No, it isn't. Posted by: Joe the Poe
Thoughts to ponder
Posted by: wisewebwoman on Sep 8, 2006 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
(1) Trusting Bush
I've been amazed at some former friends and colleagues who despite all evidence to the contrary of the Hypothetical WMDS, etc., believe in the unassailable magnificence of POTUS as WORKING FOR THEM AND MAKING ALL THE RIGHT DECISIONS AS HE COULDN'T POSSIBLY WANT TO HURT HIS FELLOW AMERICANS, JUST 'THEM' AND THEY DESERVE IT. I'm serious!! that's the 34%.
(2) Hidden agenda
I honestly believe there is a hidden agenda to the manufacturing of these biological weapons - the earth's population must be culled and what better method? Bombing, nuclear fallout, unaranium depletion and Agent Orange are taking too long, it needs to be speeded up.
(3) New Terror Alerts
Before November, this should hit triple red. More death on American soil is my prediction, what are a few more deaths when so much collateral damage has already taken place (the ongoing health difficulties of WTC workers, the devastation and death in New Orleans, the countless martyred children of Afghanistan and Iraq, the soldiers, and innocent civilians being murdered for this beyond corrupt and sickening Evil Empire who worship at the altar of wealth and power like no others before them.
Jesus weeps.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You give Christianity a bad name. Posted by: Joe the Poe
Many of US have noticed an unnerving connection between GWB and Osama bin Ladin, but...
Posted by: fool-on-the-hill on Sep 8, 2006 9:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...everyone seems to shy away from really examining it.

I don't mean the similarities in their characters (not, unfortunately, in their intellects; we should wish GW was as 'smart' as bin Ladin!). But how are the two 'camps', the Bushites and al Queda, so in synch with their propaganda? Is bin Ladin just always poised to jerk GW's chain, or are the neo-cons somehow controlling the release of al Queda's propaganda?

I'm not surprised that the terrorists want to keep GWB in power. Bush & his neo-con thugs are the best thing that ever happened for the bin Ladin camp! Al Queda doesn't even have to work at recruiting any more. Passing around pictures of U.S. attrocities in Iraq brings in more recruits than the terror-trainers can fit into their training camps!

But if the Bushites were merely incompetents (rather than traitors?), wouldn't EVEN THEY notice that they're playing right into bin Ladin's hands?!

Last night on TV, a 'repugnican' news commentator mentioned it --- the weird timing of the release of the latest bin-Ladin-9/11 tape IMMEDIATELY after GW had given a belligerant (and typically incoherent) speech about the need to be "tough on 'terra-ists'"! The TV goon (laughing, like it was a joke) came right out and said there was a "common objective" between GWB and ObL "to keep Bush in power"!

The commentator clearly thought he was being a WIT (he was HALF right!).

How can it be a joke that our worst enemy SUPPORTS the President who is claiming to be our only defense against that enemy?

WHY ARE NOT MORE PEOPLE ASKING THIS QUESTION??!!!

JUST HOW DEEP (AND PSYCHOTIC) IS THE TREASON OF THE BUSHITES???!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Osama bib Lanein is in Maryland Posted by: mwildfire
A Stab in the Heart of Democracy Itself
Posted by: sofla100 on Sep 8, 2006 11:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I cannot forget the year 2000, down here in Florida, with GW's brother Jebber and Secretary of State Katherine Harris going thru the voter roles prior to the election. Sure enough, they would "identify" thousands of what surely they thought were "felons" to be exclused from the right to vote, of whom 99% just turned out the be African Americans and not felons at all. Then you had the chads and the recount stopped by the Supreme Court. Go forward to 2004 and it was never really explained what happend in Ohio - somehow in known virtually 100% democratic districts thousands of democratic votes just disappeared - strange how that happened, isn't it? Now GW Bush was never even really elected. He was put in place by money, by cronies, by lies. The truth of the election being stolen by the way is now not even hardly ever seen in the media, even in the alternative media like Alternet it is not talked about much. That shows you how deep and devious the deception is. A stab in the heart of democracy itself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only trust Bush has is his family fund
Posted by: rollo on Sep 8, 2006 12:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) I've never trusted Bush, ever, about anything. And it blows my mind that even though he fails every test put to him, the press keeps writing "oh, if only he does X next" it will restore his popularity and ensure his legacy. This clown deserves no more second chances.

2) Bush and Bin Laden are exactly the same. They're a couple of rich kids from oil families playing cops and robbers and talking smack. Not much more to it than that.

3) Have you noticed fuel prices are coming down? By election time we'll be paying less than $2 a gallon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So What is the Solution?
Posted by: edhowes on Sep 8, 2006 1:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks ever so much for this article, Terry. It raised a lot of intelligent and perceptive response and not one solution. This is the problem of a nation suffering from a century of corporate education. The case is daily made that U.S. leadership is no more than a corporate puppet show. Terry just made the case that the American people are the greatest terrorists on planet earth. I see only two solutions. The total destruction of the American people or their eduucation. As I grow increasingly ambivalent about which solution is applied and who does it, I figure the honorable thing is to try education while we are waiting. The internet makes it possible but who among us will make it happen? If you are up for creating a few thousand sovereign citizens to lead the way in a democracy of ignorance, visit just another view dot com and send me an Email with your thoughts. We can build an effective network in less than a year.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So What is the Solution? Posted by: John Rice
Okay, so what's the plan then?
Posted by: nkinner on Sep 8, 2006 4:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay so if Bush is the anti-christ, what is your answer? It's so easy for you all to hysterically screech from the Kos/Democratic Underground/Howard Dean talking points without ever, ever offering a REASONABLE solution to the issues facing our collective safety.

If you'll recall the Islamofascists were killing us when Slick Willie was POTUS. Even worse, they were plotting the biggest attack of all while Clinton was making deposits on blue dresses.

It's easy to criticize. It's much harder to actually take a stand and lead (something Clinton could never do).

Bottom line? Quit whining and do something for a change...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Plan
Posted by: sofla100 on Sep 8, 2006 5:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can start with impeachment of Bush, followed by turning him and his cronies over to the World Court for trial. After that, we can repudiate the 2000/2004 elections and put Al Gore into the presidency. Next, we can cease our support of Israel, become an honest mideast broker, and end the conflict in the Mideast. We can withdraw from Iraq. With this and with ceasing support for Israel, the Arab world will cease to hate us and terrorism will vaporize as an issue. World oil prices will also plummet and a golden age for the economy can begin. Other things, stop "free trade," except with Western Europe or countries really on the same social/economic footing as us, no exporting jobs to third world sweatshops. Institute free medical care for all, free and universal education thru college, subsidized day care. This will cost a little bit, but with the Pentagon/National Security Apparatus gutted we can easily save close to $1 trillion a year just right there. This then is an outline of what I consider a good plan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Plan--nice job, Sofla Posted by: John Rice
» RE: The Plan--nice job, Sofla Posted by: mwildfire
The Plan
Posted by: sofla100 on Sep 8, 2006 5:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can start with impeachment of Bush, followed by turning him and his cronies over to the World Court for trial. After that, we can repudiate the 2000/2004 elections and put Al Gore into the presidency. Next, we can cease our support of Israel, become an honest mideast broker, and end the conflict in the Mideast. We can withdraw from Iraq. With this and with ceasing support for Israel, the Arab world will cease to hate us and terrorism will vaporize as an issue. World oil prices will also plummet and a golden age for the economy can begin. Other things, stop "free trade," except with Western Europe or countries really on the same social/economic footing as us, no exporting jobs to third world sweatshops. Institute free medical care for all, free and universal education thru college, subsidized day care. This will cost a little bit, but with the Pentagon/National Security Apparatus gutted we can easily save close to $1 trillion a year just right there. This then is an outline of what I consider a good plan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Plan Posted by: domenico234
» RE: The Plan Posted by: domenico234
» A blueprint for Armageddon. Posted by: Joe the Poe
Al Gore for President
Posted by: domenico234 on Sep 8, 2006 7:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now that Al Gore has finally gotten the broomstick out of his butt he will run a great campaign. Just remind him once in awhile that he should mention his mentor, William Jefferson Clinton.

Nominate Al Gore & pray to whatever God in whom you believe that he wins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Al Gore for President Posted by: Joe the Poe
Biological weapons in Bush's hands?!. . .
Posted by: monkeywrench on Sep 8, 2006 9:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . .That's like telling a toddler to hold a hand grenade – with the pin pulled.

Judging by the way the Bush administration has screwed up virtually everything it has touched, the way that it deliberately leaks information and its complete contempt for human beings, it is almost a certainty that any deadly bugs spawned by these idiots will find their way into the population. And, given the level of technology these days, they might even achieve a real breakthrough: a unstoppable pathogen that could wipe out the human race.

The jackasses in the Bush administration couldn't run a lemonade stand without giving everyone food poisoning, so why should we trust them with weapons-grade bacteria? Two more years of this criminal and inept administration, and there may not be enough left of America to salvage.

Better live it up now – with the neocons in power, everyone's days are numbered.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Patience Posted by: bullwhip7
My two-word lament.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Sep 8, 2006 9:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry, I went on too long in the previous post. Here's the short version: it's over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Incompetents! Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: My two-word lament. Posted by: hellkat
In V for Vendetta...
Posted by: Bbear41 on Sep 8, 2006 10:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the established goverment used artificial plagues to help keep the populace in line... Just a thought.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why would anyone trust him in the first place?
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Sep 9, 2006 9:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Really... are these people truly THAT naive and stupid???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "[G]ood leaders" are in damn short supply! Posted by: fool-on-the-hill
Democrats want to blame Bush for their mistakes
Posted by: bullwhip7 on Sep 9, 2006 11:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rockefeller in his 2002 speech warned that:

Saddam's government has contact with many international terrorist organizations that likely have cells here in the United States.

And:

He could make those weapons [WMD] available to many terrorist groups which have contact with his government, and those groups could bring those weapons into the U.S. and unleash a devastating attack against our citizens. I fear that greatly.

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

Yeah - Bush lied - he said his political opponents were honest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Echo, echo, echo, echo Posted by: bullwhip7
Hillary too? Go figure... Madeleine, Pelosi and more, Yeah.
Posted by: bullwhip7 on Sep 9, 2006 11:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“Let’s be clear about the threat we face now,” she thundered. “A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime’s pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not—must not—permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons.” To be sure, we need to cajole China and Russia into going along with diplomatic and economic sanctions, but “we cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran—that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons.” Hillary Clinton, Princeton University - Jan 18, 2006
(If I were to say this on this forum, I would be called a troll. Is Hillary a troll;)


"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction." - Madeline Albright, February 1, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), December 16, 1998 (always towing the party line...)

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, September 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, September 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), September 27, 2002

Yeah, no flip flops here folks. Just good ole Democratic downright lies... Yeah.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» All Politicians Lie Posted by: Jeanne
» Hear, hear Posted by: bullwhip7
Shaving without losing your head
Posted by: medbear on Sep 10, 2006 6:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These are worrisome news. The secrecy, that is. Knowledge in itself is not necessarily bad, not even when concerning bad bugs and vile viruses. I think it is important to be able to "shave without cutting your head off" when discussing this.

The need to do research is valid. As stated in the article, manufacturing biological agents is pretty easy compared to many other kinds of weapons. The plague, smallpox and others are ready for the picking somewhere. Others are yet to be made into a "convenient" agent, such as Ebola. Weaponising these agents is another matter, and furthermore controlling them.

But why do research? Well, a good reason would be to test out scenarios by evaluating them "doable" or "not doable". This could take the edge of a lot of horror-scenarios presented by well meaning media and those in need of a conspiracy. More interesting still is to find cures, vaccines and other counter-meassures that could be properly evaluated for side effects and efficiency. Whole continents would benefit from this. Yet another would be to design ways of effectively detecting these agents, whether used as a weapon (to please the doomsday-scare people) or by their natural dissimination (more interesting for the larger part of the world).

The harder question is why this should be secret. If the objective is defence, the communication of knowledge (not necessarily on production, but general results and viable counter meassures) could discourage any bright wrong-doer from trying to make his own, and the cures/vaccines/counter-meassures to any horrific disease could be truly available to the countries that mostly need them - including many too poor to benefit from research made by the pharmaceutical industry.

If one agree that research on exotic diseases is beneficial, and that this should include research into the possibilities of willful exploitation of these agents, all in order to develop good and thoroughly evaluated cures/vaccines/counter-meassures and means of detection, this (in my opinion) should prefferably be done by non-profit agencies. I would prefer that it was not done by the military, as they by default like to classify stuff, and that the words "military" and "classified" in combination makes for too much, and probably often rightful, suspicion on the true motivation for the activity. CDC or similar would be better, though in todays situation I can understand doubts about their independence as well - and there is an overlap with the military that cannot be ignored. If, on the other hand, society depends solely on the pharmaceutical, private, industry, secrecy will still be tight, if not tighter, with far less possibility for insight from external controllers, and there will necessarily be a high price to pay for any useful result.

As for accidents; yes, sure, they could happen, and I for one appreciate any reluctance on behalf of any community to host a facility like this in its midst. On the other hand, most of the shit is out there somewhere already, waiting to infect someone near you. Spreading research to multiple facilities (universities, laboratories, etc) might reduce concentration, but might at the same time increase the risk of accidents.

My line of thought rests on 2 requirements:
1) The motivations are limited only to find cures, vaccines, other counter-meassures and detection techniques, and:
2) The authorities will share the knowledge to those in need.

The end producers would necessarily be the private industry, but without copyrights any producer could make his bid for contracts (price related to production cost and necessary profit only), or - where such are present - publicly owned producers could meet local needs.

The final challenge is, as I understand from most of the posts here: Can we trust the government? If not, what are the alternatives?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THOSE BASTARDS!
Posted by: Joe the Poe on Sep 11, 2006 10:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How DARE they try to further safegaurd us by doing medical research in a secure facility! AND WITHOUT BREAKING THE LAWS! This is a step too far! And Duct tape?! It isn't right that they go off sealing windows with something that prevents microbes from escaping! They should use something that doesn't seal them, so innocent people die! Even better, we shouldn't try to protect ourselves from disease! Everyone, fight for the cause! Run outside and start licking sewer drains and shoveling dirt into your mouth!

On a slightly less sarcastic note, oversight DOES also mean the unintentional failure to notice something. Bush had proof (Via the previous administration) that Iraq has WMDs, and this article is pointing an accusing finger at human error-Acidents happen, oh might omnipotent author of a leftist web site. Would you please make everything perfect if we sacrificed some children to you? We'll even say it's for the good of medical research.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That was a movie. A FICTIONAL movie.
Posted by: Joe the Poe on Sep 11, 2006 10:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm glad we're all looking to Hollywood for our facts. I'll be the administration is also breeding dinosaurs on a secret island, too, so they can let them loose to ravage innocents as they magically conjure up hurricanes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]