Fears and thoughts in South Africa

Muhtiman wrote: ......how does Cyril get a vaccine jab from a nurse not wearing surgical gloves.....:huh:

why do they have to wear surgical gloves to give a jab?

SA a complicated country to live in at the moment.
On the Official COVID 19 figures in SA we seem to be winning the fight at the moment. Eastern Cape shows very low numbers now. KZN the highest active cases.
Will the ANC be able to rollout 80 million doses in a reasonable amount of time?
We have the budget speech next week. probably no good news for the middle class and business owners.
Booze and Tobacco to be murdered. Petrol probably also big tax increase.
worth watching the EWC and NHA bills.
Zondo commission still remains a giant talk fest with no one going to jail yet.
Markus Jooste continues to show the authorities the middle finger. seems the NPA and SIU dont have qualified people to unravel whjat he got up to.
We have had amazing rain fall in large parts of the country.
BITCOIN blows my mind, i dont get the valuation but if u have bought through a reputable platform i expect a large gift at Christmas time.
The rest of the rest of the world nor sunshine and roses either however their are some starting to stretch away again. Australia and New Zealand good data on all fronts.
USA still on fire. Talk about cutting ur nose off.

Listening to another chapter in CR7's fantasy tale...hope it's the last SONA he does...and I'm pretty certain that there are moved afoot within the ANC to kick him aside as more in the pro RET camp are attacked...they see that he got his so now it is their turn...

I had my jab on Monday and I can tell you that I feel weird, it’s as if I have had something injected into my body which should not be there. I am positive that there is a micro chip making it’s way toward my brain. More to follow as I can feel it approaching the back of my neck.

CnC 306 wrote: I had my jab on Monday and I can tell you that I feel weird, it’s as if I have had something injected into my body which should not be there. I am positive that there is a micro chip making it’s way toward my brain. More to follow as I can feel it approaching the back of my neck.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Members of the Flat Earth society will not get their jabs because of this microchip. It must be a see thru chip as you can see the clear fluid when someone gets vaccinated.

I support 100000% the capturing of data when you get your jab. In time people that have chosen not to be vaccinated should be disallowed in any public area. End of.

Over the Air wrote: [quote="CnC 306" post=812157

Members of the Flat Earth society will not get their jabs because of this microchip. It must be a see thru chip as you can see the clear fluid when someone gets vaccinated.

I support 100000% the capturing of data when you get your jab. In time people that have chosen not to be vaccinated should be disallowed in any public area. End of.

Lol.....It's like entering a Miciti bus station or bus, you tap in with your card and tap out at the end of each trip.
Then tap in at Picknpay....the Hairdresser......the Car Wash .....
list goes on and on......
T and C' with the vaccines comes with continued use of masks, sanitizing.

P.S. Hope the immune system doesn't go into overdrive and select autoimmune .
CnC 306 you will be keeping us updated.

Ballsup …...Part Two...….Comedy Club Continues...……


New study shows Pfizer vaccine not protective against African version of COVID-19


Thursday, 18 February 2021 3:15 PM [ Last Update: Thursday, 18 February 2021 3:33 PM ]






This photo illustration taken on November 23, 2020 shows a syringe and a bottle reading "Covid-19 Vaccine" next to the Pfizer company logo. (By AFP)


A new study published in one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals shows that the Pfizer vaccine is largely ineffective against the dominant local variant of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 in South Africa.

The worrying results of the fresh study were published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday, suggesting that the African variant of the coronavirus may decrease antibody protection from Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine by two-thirds.

The South African government is counting on the Pfizer vaccine, developed with German partner BioNTech, to boost its COVID-19 vaccination program in the coming months.

The new study comes less than two weeks after interim data on British drugmaker AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine also heightened concerns about its efficacy against the more contagious South African variant, prompting Johannesburg to temporarily postpone the rollout of the AstraZeneca vaccine.

The detailed laboratory study took into account all the key mutations of the 501Y.V2 variant, whereas a paper released late last month only measured the impact of three key mutations of the variant on the Pfizer vaccine.

The African country, with nearly 1.5 million cases and about 48,500 deaths, has recorded nearly half the COVID-19 fatalities and more than a third of confirmed infections in the entire continent.



Dozens in US develop rare blood disorder after taking Pfizer COVID vaccines

Dozens in US develop rare blood disorder after taking Pfizer COVID vaccines


Nearly 40 American recipients of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccines in the US develop a rare immune disorder that attacks the blood. One patient died after receiving the vaccine.




The South African strain shares some of the mutations with the previously discovered UK variant, known as B.1.1.7.

The efficacy of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines have raised suspicious around the world, with many even in the US remaining hesitant to get the vaccine. However, major American and British media apparently reached a consensus to downplay the deaths.

Major General Jeff Taliaferro, vice director of operations for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in Congressional hearing on Wednesday that about one-third of the US military have refused to receive the Covid-19 vaccine, despite significant virus infection levels in the forces.

"Acceptance rates are somewhere in the two-thirds territory," he added.



One-third of US military refusing Covid vaccine as Pfizer reported less effective against variant

One-third of US military refusing Covid vaccine as Pfizer reported less effective against variant



About one-third of the US military have refused to receive the Covid-19 vaccine, despite significant virus infection levels in the forces, Pentagon officials say.


The Norwegian Medicines Agency said earlier in January that major American and British media have apparently reached a consensus to downplay the death of at least 23 people in Norway who received the COVID-19 vaccine developed by US firm Pfizer and German BioNTech.


The agency added that all 13 of the fatalities were above the age of 80, adding it is possible that common side effects of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, such as fever and nausea, may have contributed to severe reactions in frail, elderly people.


The agency’s medical director, Steinar Madsen, told national broadcaster NRK that in addition to the 13 deaths, nine cases of serious side effects and seven instances of less serious side effects have also been recorded.


US, UK media silent on Pfizer vaccine after 23 Norwegian deaths


US, UK media silent on Pfizer vaccine after 23 Norwegian deaths


The people received vaccines made by the US firm Pfizer and Germany


“Doctors must now carefully consider who should be vaccinated. Those who are very frail and at the very end of life can be vaccinated after an individual assessment,” he added.


The Norwegian Institute of Public Health also said, “For those with the most severe frailty, even relatively mild vaccine side effects can have serious consequences.”

Shocking scenes in Bloemfontein where thousand of ACE supporters arrive in buses.

No social distance, masks

Super spreader event, these supporters are totally in favour of corruption and against the judiciary system.
Shocking state of affairs.😢

I think its a case of manipulation rather than them supporting corruption. These guys are conmen. They control the leaders in the area, who in turn control the people. It is easier to control uneducated people. That is why dictatorships cripple the education systems. That is why burning of schools is a big problem in SA.

Just an update of the micro chip that was inserted into me when I had my covid jab. As I posted yesterday it was close to my neck. It made some progress overnight and now is firmly lodge against one of the 22 bones which my head contains. I am sure that those who monitor the chips have not connected me up yet as the chip has not made it to its final destination into my brain.

I am now desperately in need of help from one of you anti vaxxer nut jobs on this site who obviously have also had the micro chip injected into you as otherwise you would not have known that is what they do when you have the covid jab. So please send out a message to who ever controls and monitors you and tell them that subject B4567189 has a problem. Thanks

Fort Detrick………………...the mother of all bioweapons...… article from the year 2007




New Fort Detrick BioDefense Laboratory May Reflect a Bush Germ War Effort



By Sherwood Ross

Global Research, February 05, 2007

afterdowningstreet.org/node 5 February 2007


Theme: Biotechnology and GMO, Militarization and WMD












Although no foreign power has threatened a bioterror attack against America, since 9/11 the Bush administration has allocated a stunning $43-billion to “defend” against one. Critics are now saying, however, Bush’s newest “biodefense” initiative is both offensive and illegal.


The latest development, according to the Associated Press, is that the U.S. Army is replacing its Military Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Md., “with a new laboratory that would be a component of a biodefense campus operated by several agencies.” The Army told AP the laboratory is intended to continue research that is only meant for defense against biological threats.


But University of Illinois international law professor Francis Boyle charged the Fort Detrick work will include “acquiring, growing, modifying, storing, packaging and dispersing classical, emerging and genetically engineered pathogens.” Those activities, as well as planned study of the properties of pathogens when weaponized, “are unmistakable hallmarks of an offensive weapons program.”


Boyle made his comments to Fort Detrick as part of its environmental impact assessment of the new facility. Boyle pointed out in his letter that he authored the 1989 U.S. law enacted by Congress that criminalized BWC violations.


The Fort Detrick expansion is but one phase of a multi-billion biotech buildup going forward in 11 agencies sparked by the unsolved, Oct., 2001, anthrax attacks on Congress that claimed five lives and sickened 17.


The attacks, and ensuing panic, led to passage of the BioShield Act of 2004. There is strong evidence, though, the attacks were not perpetrated by any foreign government or terrorist band but originated at Fort Detrick, the huge, supposedly super-safe biotechnology research center. Despite an intensive FBI investigation, no one has been charged with a crime.


Referring to the work undertaken at Fort Detrick, Mark Wheelis, Senior Lecturer in the Section of Microbiology of the University of California, Davis, told the Global Security Newswire(GNS) as far back as June 30, 2004, “This is absolutely without any question what one would do to develop an offensive biological weapons capability.”


“We’re going to develop new pathogens for various purposes. We’re going to develop new ways of packaging them, new ways of disseminating them. We’re going to harden them to environmental degradation. We’ll be prepared to go offensive at the drop of a hat if we so desire,” he told GNS.



Alan Pearson, director of the chemical and bioweapons control program at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation Studies in Washington, told the Baltimore Sun government scientists must tread carefully lest they wind up “in essence creating new threats that we’re going to have to defend ourselves against.”


Richard Novick, a New York University microbiology professor has stated, “I cannot envision any imaginable justification for changing the antigenicity of anthrax as a defensive measure.” (That is, to create a new strain for which there is no known vaccine.)
Milton Leitenberg, a University of Maryland arms control advocate, told The Washington Post last July 30th, “If we saw others doing this kind of research (Fort Detrick), we would view it as an infringement of the bioweapons treaty. You can’t go around the world yelling about Iranian and North Korean programs, about which we know very little, when we’ve got all this going on.”

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
One alarming example of such Federally-funded research reported in the October, 2003, issue of “New Scientist,” is the creation of “an extremely deadly form of mousepox, a relative of the smallpox virus, through genetic engineering.”
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


The publication warned such research “brings closer the prospect of pox viruses that cause only mild infections in humans being turned into diseases lethal even to people who have been vaccinated.”


Edward Hammond, director of The Sunshine Project of Austin, Tex., a non-profit working for transparency in biological research, said the recreation of the deadly 1918 “Spanish flu” germ that killed an estimated 40-million world-wide, means “the possibility of man-made disaster, either accidental or deliberate, has risen for the entire world.”

Richard H. Ebright, a Rutgers University chemist who tracks arms control issues, told The Baltimore Sun the government’s tenfold expansion of Biosafety Level-4 laboratories, such as those at Fort Detrick, raises the risk of accidents or the diversion of dangerous organisms. “If a worker in one of these facilities removes a single viral particle or a single cell, which cannot be detected or prevented, that single particle or cell can form the basis of an outbreak,” he said.


The current expansion at Fort Detrick flows from a paper penned by President Bush. His Homeland Security Presidential Directive, HSPD-10, written April 28, 2004, states, “Among our many initiatives we are continuing to develop more forward-looking analyses, to include Red Teaming efforts, to understand new scientific trends that may be exploited by our adversaries to develop biological weapons and to help position intelligence collectors ahead of the problem.”


Boyle said the Bush paper is “a smoking gun” fired at the BWC. “Red Teaming means that we actually have people out there on a Red Team plotting, planning, scheming and conspiring how to use biowarfare.”


Boyle traces advocacy for aggressive biowarfare back to the neo-conservative Project for a New American Century(PNAC), whose members, including Paul Wolfowitz, later influenced President Geoge Bush’s military and foreign policy. Before assuming his current post as World Bank head, Wolfowitz served Bush as deputy secretary of defense.


Before the anthrax attacks on Congress, PNAC advocated “advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool,” Boyle wrote in “Biowarfare and Terrorism,” (Clarity Press).


Biological warfare inolves the use of living organisms for military purposes. Such weapons can be viral, bacterial, and fungal, among other forms, and can be spread over a large geographic terrain by wind, water, insect, animal, or human transmission, according to Jeremy Rifkin, author of “The Biotech Century”(Penguin).


Rifkin has written “it is widely acknowledged that it is virtually impossible to distinguish between defensive and offensive research in the field.” And Jackie Cabasso, of Western States Legal Foundation of Oakland, Calif., noted, “With biological weapons, the line between offense and defense is exceedingly difficult to draw. In the end, secrecy is the greatest enemy of safety.”
She added, “The U.S. is now massively expanding its biodefense program, mostly in secretive facilities. Other countries are going to be suspicious. This bodes badly for the future of biological weapons control.”


Critics following the biowarfare trail at Fort Detrick, are wondering if President Bush — who scrapped the nuclear proliferation treaty and then had the Pentagon design new nuclear weapons — isn’t also ignoring the BWC in order to create new germ warfare pathogens.


(Sherwood Ross is an American reporter and columnist. He worked for the Chicago Daily News and has written for wire services and national magazines. Reach him at sherwoodr1@yahoo.com)


Related Articles




Pentagon Poised To Resume Open Air Weapons Testing

Pentagon Appears Poised To Resume Open-Air Testing Of Biological Weapons But Says It Has Received No Presidential Directive To Break Moratorium The Pentagon has denied President Bush issued a directive for it to resume open-air testing of chemical and biological warfare(CBW) agents that were halted by President Richard Nixon in…

7 December 2007






The Bush Administration's Secret Biowarfare Agenda

First published in July 2008 When it comes to observing US and international laws, treaties and norms, the Bush administration is a serial offender. Since 2001, it's: -- spurned efforts for nuclear disarmament to advance its weapons program and retain current stockpiles; -- renounced the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)…

On July 31, 2007 the London Guardian reported that the US is “Building (a) Treaty-Breaching Germ War Defence Centre” near Washington, DC” – NBACC. It’s to be completed in 2008 and will be a “vast germ warfare laboratory intended to help protect the US against an attack with biological weapons, but critics say the laboratory’s work will violate international law and its extreme secrecy will exacerbate a biological arms race (by) accelerat(ing) work on similar facilities around the world.”

It will house “heavily guarded and hermetically sealed chambers….to produce and stockpile the world’s most lethal bacteria and viruses” – forbidden by the 1972 BWC and 1989 US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act. The Fort Detrick facility will be used for the new 160,000 square foot lab, and it’s authorization coincided with the 2001 anthrax attacks that killed five people, and along with 9/11, unleashed everything that followed.

DHS calls Fort Detrick the home of “The National Interagency Biodefense Campus.” Besides NBACC, other agencies there include:


— the Health and Human Services’ (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID);

— the Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service and Foreign Disease-Weed Science Research Unit (FDWSRU); and

— the Department of Defense’s US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID).

DHS says USAMRIID “conduct(s) basic and applied research on biological threats (to provide) cutting-edge medical research for the warfighter against biological threats.” International law and bioweapons expert, Francis Boyle, disagrees. He says the “program constitutes clear violations of the international (1972 BWC) arms control treaty….ratified by the United States in 1975.” He also cites BWC’s preamble that states in part:

“….Parties to this Convention (are) Determined to act with a view to achieving effective progress towards general and complete disarmament, including the prohibition and elimination of all types of weapons of mass destruction, and convinced that the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons and their elimination, through effective measures, will facilitate the achievement of general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control….” The BWC goes on to say that use of these weapons are so “repugnant to the conscience of mankind….that no effort should be spared to minimize this risk.”

In Boyle’s view, Fort Detrick’s NBACC and USAMRIID heighten risks because their work involves: “acquiring, growing, modifying, storing, packaging and dispersing classical, emerging and genetically engineered pathogens.” This work is an “unmistakable hallmark of an offensive weapons program” in violation of the 1989 Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act that he authored. Even worse according to Edward Hammond, former director of the Sunshine Project: Recreating the deadly 1918 “Spanish flu” germ that killed an estimated 40 million worldwide (or other dangerous pathogens) increases “the possibility of (a) man-made disaster, either accidental or deliberate….for the entire world.” If a single viral particle or cell escapes or is unleashed, an enormous outbreak may result with potentially catastrophic consequences.

The Fort Detrick plan derives from a Bush Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-10) written April 28, 2004. It states: “Among our many initiatives we are continuing to develop more forward-looking analyses, to include Red Teaming efforts, to understand new scientific trends that may be exploited by our adversaries to develop biological weapons and to help position intelligence collectors ahead of the problem.” Boyle calls it “a smoking gun” aimed at the BWC.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
“Red Teaming means that we actually have people out there on a Red Team plotting, planning, scheming and conspiring how to use biowarfare” and sooner or later will unleash it using living organisms for military purposes. They may be viral, bacterial, fungal, or other forms that can spread over a vast terrain by wind, water, insect, animal, or humans, according to Jeremy Rifkin, author of “The Biotech Century.” Rifkin also asserts it’s “impossible to distinguish between defensive and offensive research in the field,” and given this administration’s penchant for lying and secrecy, other nations will be justifiably suspicious.

The Bush administration proceeded anyway. Since 9/11, it spent or allocated around $50 billion on bioweapons development through 11 federal departments and agencies, including DOD and DHS. For FY 2009, it wants an additional $8.1 billion or $2.5 billion more than in FY2008. It calls its program preventive and defensive and cites Project BioShield as an example. It became law in July 2004 as a 10 year program to develop countermeasures to biological, chemical, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) agents. It was, in fact, a gift to companies like Gilead Sciences, the company Donald Rumsfeld led as chairman from 1997 to 2001 (and remains a major shareholder) until he left to become George Bush’s Defense Secretary.

It would have also required every American to be vaccinated under the Biodefense and Pandemic Vaccine and Drug Development Act of 2005. It passed the Senate but not the House and would have, under a public emergency, allowed experimental or approved drugs to be used with insufficient knowledge of their safety – in violation of the Nuremburg Code on medical experimentation. It also would have immunized companies from liability and denied those harmed the right to sue.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



Private Bioweapons Labs Cashing In

According to the Sunshine Project, “scores of US universities and biotechnology companies (since 2001) have benefitted handsomely from billions of dollars in ‘biodefense’ cash. Across the country, ‘biodefense’ labs are sprouting up like weeds. The unrelenting spigot of federal money (has) thousands of scientists and technicians” doing bioweapons research on some of the deadliest pathogens. But the problem is much greater than that:


— projects underway are illegal;

— immense secrecy enshrouds them; and

— federal oversight is so lax that NIH safety guidelines aren’t enforced and CDC poorly identifies problems it should address; as a result, “accidents are popping up everywhere” amidst a “pervasive cover-up culture” that hides them – in direct violation of federal rules and responsible practice that:

(1) require government agencies to protect the public from dangerous pathogens, and

(2) obligate research labs to disclose the nature of their work; failure to do so suggests alleged biodefense research is, in fact, cover for offensive biowarfare programs to complement Fort Detrick and other government site efforts.



The Sunshine Project believes about 400 private bioweapons labs now operate around the country with no public disclosure of their activities – and plenty of reasons to worry Francis Boyle that the Bush administration is up to mischief. It “sabotaged the Verification Protocol for the BWC (and) fully intend(s) to (engage in) research, development and testing of illegal and criminal offensive biowarfare programs.” That prospect should frighten everyone.


Reporter Sherwood Ross for sure. He calls the administration’s project “the costliest, most grandiose research scheme ever attempted (with) germ warfare capability….going forward under President Bush and in defiance of” US and international laws. Far worse, where once “germ warfare was an isolated happenstance, (today’s efforts elevate it) to an instrument of (deadly and loathsome) policy.


Other Recent Developments

On February 21, 2008, the Sidney Morning Herald reported that the Bush administration rejected claims made by Indonesian Health Minister, Siti Fadilah Supari, in her book titled: “It Is Time for the World to Change! God’s Hand Behind Bird Flu Virus.” She questions whether the US is using bird flu samples collected from developing nations to develop biological weapons, not new vaccines as claimed.


On July 20, 2008, the Jakarta Post reported: “If there were a “National Darling Award” contest….Supari would probably win it. (Her) supporters praise her as a great third world heroine who dares challenge the global structure of injustice and inequality perpetrated by powerful states (like the US) and networks of international institutions. Most of the praise is based on opinions” from her new book mentioned above.


She claims the US is transferring virus samples to the Los Alamos National Laboratory. It’s one of two US nuclear weapons labs that will operate new biological research facilities capable of researching and developing dangerous pathogens in violation of the BWC and US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989. California-based Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is the other one. On January 25, it began operating a new Biosafety Level 3 (BSL-3) lab. In August, Los Alamos is scheduled to complete a federally mandated environmental study for a similar lab to begin operations shortly thereafter. Given the Bush administration’s penchant for secrecy, Supari’s accusations may be justified.


The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) establishes biosafety classifications. BLS-4 ones, like for Ebola, are the most dangerous, in part, because no known cures exist. Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore currently operate BLS-2 labs. They’ll now have BLS-3 ones to study infectious agents able to cause serious or fatal illnesses if inhaled. But there’s no way to know if both labs, Fort Detrick, others like the former Edgewood Arsenal (now the Edgewood Area at the Aberdeen Proving Ground), Oak Ridge Ridge National Laboratory, and still more we don’t know about will secretly research any type pathogens, including the most dangerous ones, for any purpose – offense or defense.


What is known is that government labs will study pathogens posing serious public health and safety threats. Ones like anthrax, botulism, brucellosis, plague, Rickettsia, tularemia, Avian influenza, H5N1 (the recent strain reported and called the most dangerous), and valley fever plus whatever others are planned but kept secret.


Most important is this. These labs conduct weapons research, so they’ll likely focus on bioweapons and not follow BWC “prophylactic, protective, or other peaceful purposes” guidelines. For example, vaccines and potential biological weapons defenses may, in fact, be for offense. Distinguishing between the two is impossible so other nations and figures like Supari are suspicious.


They’re not comforted by Lawrence Livermore’s Lynda Seaver. On February 12, she told Arms Control Today that the US is “a signatory to the Biowarfare Convention and does not conduct bioweapons research.” She also said most work there will be unclassified. On February 15, however, a CDC spokesperson suggested otherwise and informed Arms Control Today that Lawrence Livermore security restrictions are tight as they are at Los Alamos, Fort Detrick and other US weapons research facilities. They bar transparency and place strict limits on sharing select agents research to prevent other nations from knowing it exists or its purpose.


Further, later this year DHS will complete construction of the new Fort Detrick lab (NBACC), and a new $500 million animal research facility is planned. Both will have BLS-3 and 4 capabilities. They’ll work on the most dangerous known pathogens and conduct controversial type threat assessment research – to develop and produce new biological weapons and develop defenses against them. Once again, differentiating between offense and defense is impossible, and given their penchant for deception and secrecy, no one takes Bush administration officials at their word nor should they.


Francis Boyle’s “Biowarfare and Terrorism”


Boyle drafted the 1989 Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act and covers it in his 2006 book. It’s now codified in Title 18 of the US Code, sections 175 – 178 and was the implementing legislation for the landmark 1972 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).


MIT molecular biology professor Jonathan King wrote this about the book in its forward:


It “outlines how and why the United States government initiated, sustained and then dramatically expanded an illegal biological arms buildup….Boyle reveals how the new (multi-) billion-dollar US Chemical and Biological Defense Program has been reoriented (endorsing “first strike” CBW use in war) to accord with the Neo-Conservative pre-emptive strike agenda – this time by (illegal) biological and chemical warfare.” This “represent(s) a significant emerging danger to our population (and) threaten(s) international relations among nations.” These programs “are always called defensive (but) with biological weapons, defensive and offensive programs overlap almost completely.”


“Boyle (also) sheds new light on the motives for the (2001) anthrax attacks, the media black hole of silence (about them), and why the FBI may never apprehended the perpetrators of this seminal crime of the 21st century.” They killed five people, injured 17 others, and temporarily shut down Congress, the Supreme Court, and other federal operations. Army scientist Dr. Steven Hatfill was unfairly implicated as a “person of interest” but was never charged. He sued the Justice Department and in June was awarded $2.8 million and a $150,000 annuity for violating his privacy, leaking false and inflammatory information, costing him his job and reputation, and blasting his name all over the media for days. It was the beginning of the frightening events that followed.


Boyle is currently a leading proponent of an effort to impeach George Bush, Dick Cheney and other high-level administration figures for their crimes of war, against humanity and other grievous violations of domestic and international law. In his “Biowarfare and Terrorism,” he sounds an alarm about the administration’s bioweapons program and what it means for humanity. He fears “a catastrophic biowarfare or bioterrorist incident or accident (is) a statistical certainty.” It highlights enormous new risks plus other frightening ones like the possibility of nuclear war and catastrophic fallout from it. That, permanent wars, a potential Andromeda Strain, police state justice, and destroying the republic are but five among other threats since the advent of George Bush and his roguish team.


In “Biowarfare and Terrorism,” Boyle addresses the bioweapons threat as an expert on the subject and gives readers an historical perspective. He asserts that the US government dramatically expanded an illegal biological arms development, production, and buildup that endangers all humanity with its potential. It’s part of an extremist agenda for unchallengeable power and right to unleash “proactive” wars with the most aggressive weapons in its arsensal – nuclear, chemical, biological, others, space-based ones, and new ones in development.


Since WW II, America has actively developed, tested, and used terror weapons, including biological ones. Even after Nixon ended the nation’s biowarfare programs, they never stopped. The CIA remained active through a loophole in the law, then the Reagan administration reactivated what Nixon slowed down. It acted much like the current regime with many of the same officials espousing similar extremist views – that America must exploit its technological superiority and not let laws, norms, or the greater good deter them.


The Bush administration raised the stakes and threatens all humanity. Boyle believes it used 9/11 and the anthrax attacks to stampede Congress and the public into aggressive wars and a menu of repressive laws. He also thinks the FBI knows who’s behind the anthrax attacks: criminal US government elements planning a police state and another frightening enterprise – to fight and win a future biowar. A possible nuclear one as well. Boyle sounds the alarm about what may lie ahead and its potential consequences.


In October 2003, the National Academy of Sciences did as well. It warned about the “misuse of tools, technology, or knowledge base of (bioweapons) research for offensive military or terrorist purposes.” That’s the present risk. It makes everyone unwitting subjects of a recklessly endangering experiment.


Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.


Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Mondays from 11AM – 1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests. All programs are archived for easy listening.

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9671

Another classic

Law is soft on criminals: Zuma: