Everybody be a Bioweaponeer! It's Easy and Fun!
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth
kmdi...@comcast.net
To:
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com,
Jgerb...@cdc.gov, len...@courant.com, motomani...@yahoo.com,
con...@po.state.ct.us, executiv...@nytimes.com,
managin...@nytimes.com, news...@nytimes.com,
the-...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
me...@nytimes.com, nati...@nytimes.com, spo...@nytimes.com,
dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net, tr...@hotmail.com,
ubi...@courant.com, spin...@yahoogroups.com, ma...@concentric.net,
camp...@courant.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
edi...@commondreams.org, kur...@washpost.com, georg...@washpost.com,
hor...@courant.com, commissi...@po.state.ct.us,
cohen...@aol.com, leonar...@po.state.ct.us, FalN...@aol.com,
brans...@comcast.net, vts...@comcast.net, mcne...@aol.com,
o...@po.state.ct.us, da...@davila-dilzer.com,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, attorney...@po.state.ct.us,
randall...@usdoj.gov,patrick....@jud.state.ct.us,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us
CC:
fra...@ucia.gov,dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, dh...@courant.com, hor...@courant.com,
bmi...@newstimes.com, eliot....@oag.state.ny.us, tr...@hotmail.com,
rast...@aol.com, bill...@comcast.net, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com, paulcrai...@yahoo.com,
sidney_b...@yahoo.com, criminal...@usdoj.gov,
karla.d...@usdoj.gov, christophe...@usdoj.gov,
fra...@ucia.gov, govern...@po.state.ct.us, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov,
model...@sbcglobal.net,dsha...@poughkeepsiejournal.com
Subject:
Bioweapons Manual....[SpinLyme] Bush "Developing Illegal Bioterror
Weapons" for Offensive Use
Date:
Friday, December 22, 2006 7:20:02 AM
Yes, that report is hot- making its way around the internet faster than
the
speed of light.
However, this has been going on at Yale since WWII with Yale's Tully
and Shope
Gang and the Rockefeller Institute.
Everyone should read this, since all of it is verified except the part
where I
did not know where we got our "US Attorney." I mistook O'Connor for
John
A. Connolly, the most vicious State prosecutor this state ever had.
O'Connor
comes from the Rowland Family Friends at Bantam Lake Home Improvements
a la Ragaglia/Ellef's Pedicatric Jails and in the Corrupt Governor's
Office.
(The Mrs.)
http://www.actionlyme.org/LYME_CORRUPTICUT.htm
(That's my silly little letter to Homeland Security, thinking they were
actually
Homeland Security, before I understood that they're another just
psychopaths club,
like DCF, who are not a child welfare agency, but rather a pool from
which to
pharm "no-nexus" test subjects for Yale @ BigPharma's psychotropics.
http://www.actionlyme.org/HOWE_BBC_SCIENCE_EVIDENCE.htm Silly me.
Why do I always suppose dot guv entities are employed to be employed,
as in,
"DO THEIR JOBS" rather than the unions simply, across the board,
unaccountably whore off the system?
See, Republicans got it backwards- the vast majority of the people who
are
actually "irresponsible" are the ones in receipt of DOT GUV paychecks,
and
not the welfare recipients. Best examples: George W. Bush and Dick
Cheney @ Halliburton pipelines and Enron @ Post-Soviet-Afghanistan-
Caspian-Sea-Opportunists Dot Com.)
HOW TO GROW YOUR OWN:
Tully JG (@ Yale Bioweapons Inc dot Plum Island dot Whoops):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=PureSearch&db=pubmed&details_term=tully%20JG%5BAuthor%5D
There are 2 Shopes, father and son with the same initials:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=PureSearch&db=pubmed&details_term=SHOPE%20RE%5BAuthor%5D
Yale's Durland Fish @ More Accidental Releases dot duh:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=PureSearch&db=pubmed&details_term=9499019%5BUID%5D
A Borgischmord:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi?mode=Undef&id=131567&lvl=3&lin=f&keep=1&srchmode=1&unlock
Mix and match, Grow your own! Use the microwave to grow resistant
bugs.
Start with a freshly killed red-tailed hawk and some wild mice! Pharm
the junk
back and forth. Recycle through the microwave and in a petri dish with
some
antimicrobials. Always a new, resistant, batch of strains will emerge,
because
all you're doing is enhancing the speed of evolution, which is the same
thing they
do at Plum Island.
Enjoy!
Kathleen
To:
<Spin...@yahoogroups.com>
Subject:
[SpinLyme] Bush "Developing Illegal Bioterror Weapons" for
Offensive Use
Date:
Thursday, December 21, 2006 2:15:32 PM
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/122006R.shtml
Bush "Developing Illegal Bioterror Weapons" for Offensive Use
By Sherwood Ross
t r u t h o u t | Guest Contributor
Wednesday 20 December 2006
In violation of the US Code and international law, the Bush
administration
is spending more money (in inflation-adjusted dollars) to develop
illegal,
offensive germ warfare than the $2 billion spent in World War II on the
Manhattan Project to make the atomic bomb.
So says Francis Boyle, the professor of international law who
drafted the
Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 enacted by Congress. He
states the
Pentagon "is now gearing up to fight and 'win' biological warfare"
pursuant to
two Bush national strategy directives adopted "without public knowledge
and
review" in 2002.
The Pentagon's Chemical and Biological Defense Program was revised
in 2003
to implement those directives, endorsing "first-use" strike of chemical
and
biological weapons (CBW) in war, says Boyle, who teaches at the
University of
Illinois, Champaign.
Terming the action "the proverbial smoking gun," Boyle said the
mission of
the controversial CBW program "has been altered to permit development
of
offensive capability in chemical and biological weapons!" [Original
italics.]
The same directives, Boyle charges in his book Biowarfare and
Terrorism
(Clarity Press), "unconstitutionally usurp and nullify the right and
the power
of the United States Congress to declare war, in gross and blatant
violation of
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution."
For fiscal years 2001-2004, the federal government funded $14.5
billion "for
ostensibly 'civilian' biowarfare-related work alone," a "truly
staggering" sum,
Boyle wrote.
Another $5.6 billion was voted for "the deceptively-named 'Project
BioShield,'" under which Homeland Security is stockpiling vaccines and
drugs to
fight anthrax, smallpox and other bioterror agents, wrote Boyle.
Protection of
the civilian population is, he said, "one of the fundamental
requirements for
effectively
waging biowarfare."
The Washington Post reported December 12 that both houses of
Congress this
month passed legislation "considered by many to be an effort to salvage
the
two-year-old Project BioShield, which has been marked by delays and
operational
problems." When President Bush signs it into law, it will allocate $1
billion
more over three years for additional research "to pump more money into
the
private sector sooner."
"The enormous amounts of money" purportedly dedicated to "civilian
defense"
that are now "dramatically and increasingly" being spent," Boyle
writes, "betray
this administration's effort to be able to embark on offensive
campaigns using
biowarfare."
By pouring huge sums into university and private-sector
laboratories, Boyle
charged, federal spending has diverted the US biotech industry to
biowarfare.
According to Rutgers University molecular biologist Richard
Ebright, over
300 scientific institutions and 12,000 individuals have access to
pathogens
suitable
for biowarfare and terrorism. Ebright found that the number of National
Institute of Health grants to research infectious diseases with
biowarfare
potential has shot up from 33 in 1995-2000 to 497.
Academic biowarfare participation involving the abuse of DNA
genetic
engineering since the late 1980s has become "patently obvious," Boyle
said.
"American universities have a long history of willingly permitting
their
research agendas, researchers, institutes, and laboratories to be
co-opted,
corrupted, and perverted by the Pentagon and the CIA."
"These despicable death-scientists were arming the Pentagon with
the
component units necessary to produce a massive array of ...
genetically-engineered biological weapons," Boyle said.
In a forward to Boyle's book, Jonathan King, a professor of
molecular
biology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote that "the
growing
bioterror programs represent a significant emerging danger to our own
population" and "threaten international relations among
nations."
While such programs "are always called defensive," King said, "with
biological weapons, defensive and offensive programs overlap almost
completely."
Boyle contends the US is "in breach" of both the Biological Weapons
and
Chemical Weapons conventions and US domestic criminal law. In February
2003, for
example, the US granted itself a patent on an illegal long-range
biological-weapons grenade.
Boyle said other countries grasp the military implications of US
germ-warfare actions and will respond in kind. "The world will soon
witness a de
facto biological arms race among the major biotech states under the
guise of
'defense,' and despite the requirements of the Biological Warfare
Convention."
"The massive proliferation of biowarfare technology and facilities,
as well
as trained scientists and technicians all over the United States,
courtesy of
the Neo-Con Bush Jr. administration will render a catastrophic
biowarfare or
bioterrorist incident or accident a statistical
certainty," Boyle warned.
As far back as September 2001, according to a report in the New
York Times
titled "US Pushes Germ Warfare Limits," critics were concerned that
"the
research comes close to violating a global 1972 treaty that bans such
weapons."
But US officials responded at the time that they were more worried
about
understanding the threat of germ warfare and devising possible
defenses.
The 1972 treaty, which the US signed, forbids developing weapons
that spread
disease, such as anthrax, regarded as "ideal" for germ warfare.
According to an article in the Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel of
last
September 28, Milton Leitenberg, a veteran arms-control advocate at the
University of Maryland, said the government was spending billions on
germ
warfare with almost no analysis of threat. He said claims terrorists
will use
the weapons have been "deliberately exaggerated."
In March of the previous year, 750 US biologists signed a letter
protesting
what they saw as the excessive study
of bioterror threats.
The Pentagon has not responded to the charges made by Boyle in this
article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sherwood Ross is a Virginia-based free-lance writer on political
and
military issues. Contact him at sherw...@yahoo.com.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Harvester of Sorrow
Usenet Supreme
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth
8man12
Usenet
Peenies, Peenies, Peenies, My Name is Chuck and I love McSweenies'
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth wrote:
8man12
Peenies, ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Peenies, Peenies, Peenies, My Name is Chuck and I love McSweenies'
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth wrote:
Harvester of Sorrow
Peenies, ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Chuck Hearts Foley
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth wrote:
Harvester of Sorrow
Chuck Hearts FoleyZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Peenies, Peenies, Peenies, My Name is Chuck and I love McSweenies'
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth wrote:
Harvester of Sorrow
Peenies, Peenies, ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Peenies, Peenies, Peenies, My Name is Chuck and I love McSweenies'
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth wrote:
8man12
Peenies, Peenies, Peenies,
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Peenies, Peenies, Peenies, My Name is Chuck and I love McSweenies'
Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth wrote:
Harvester of Sorrow
Peenies, Peenies, ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ