April 1, 2003
Media Compilation #126: Operation Iraqi Martyrdom
Dear journalist
After droping more than 7000 precision guided bombs and over 700 cruise missiles on Iraq as well as unleashing its awesome firepower, the U.S./UK "coalition" is now faced with the prospect of ever more suicide attacks, not to mention the fierce resistance of the Iraqi army.
Instead of freedom it is martyrdom they are bringing to Iraq!
Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator
http://www.EarthRainbowNetwork.com
This compilation is archived at http://www.EarthRainbowNetwork.com/Archives2003/MediaCompilation126.htm
CONTENTS
1. IRAQWAR.RU - March 30 Update
2. While The War Rages, Did You Miss This?
3. The U.S. Military's War On The Earth
4. Scientists wary of Bush bioweapons plan
See also:
US MARINES TURN FIRE ON CIVILIANS AT THE BRIDGE OF DEATH (March 30)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-628258,00.html
THE light was a strange yellowy grey and the wind was coming up, the beginnings of a sandstorm. The silence felt almost eerie after a night of shooting so intense it hurt the eardrums and shattered the nerves. My footsteps felt heavy on the hot, dusty asphalt as I walked slowly towards the bridge at Nasiriya. A horrific scene lay ahead. Some 15 vehicles, including a minivan and a couple of trucks, blocked the road. They were riddled with bullet holes. Some had caught fire and turned into piles of black twisted metal. Others were still burning. Amid the wreckage I counted 12 dead civilians, lying in the road or in nearby ditches. All had been trying to leave this southern town overnight, probably for fear of being killed by US helicopter attacks and heavy artillery. Their mistake had been to flee over a bridge that is crucial to the coalition's supply lines and to run into a group of shell-shocked young American marines with orders to shoot anything that moved. One man's body was still in flames. It gave out a hissing sound. Tucked away in his breast pocket, thick wads of banknotes were turning to ashes. His savings, perhaps. Down the road, a little girl, no older than five and dressed in a pretty orange and gold dress, lay dead in a ditch next to the body of a man who may have been her father. Half his head was missing. Nearby, in a battered old Volga, peppered with ammunition holes, an Iraqi woman - perhaps the girl's mother - was dead, slumped in the back seat. A US Abrams tank nicknamed Ghetto Fabulous drove past the bodies. This was not the only family who had taken what they thought was a last chance for safety. A father, baby girl and boy lay in a shallow grave. On the bridge itself a dead Iraqi civilian lay next to the carcass of a donkey. As I walked away, Lieutenant Matt Martin, whose third child, Isabella, was born while he was on board ship en route to the Gulf, appeared beside me. "Did you see all that?" he asked, his eyes filled with tears. "Did you see that little baby girl? I carried her body and buried it as best I could but I had no time. It really gets to me to see children being killed like this, but we had no choice." Martin's distress was in contrast to the bitter satisfaction of some of his fellow marines as they surveyed the scene. "The Iraqis are sick people and we are the chemotherapy," said Corporal Ryan Dupre. "I am starting to hate this country. Wait till I get hold of a friggin' Iraqi. No, I won't get hold of one. I'll just kill him." CLIP - Go read the horrifying rest at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-628258,00.html
US prepares for slaughter in Iraq (March 26)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/mar2003/iwar-m26.shtml
American support waning
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/iraqwar/story/0,4395,180403,00.html?
ABOUT 55 per cent of the US public believe that Washington had falsely raised expectations about the war, with 29 per cent saying that officials did so to increase public support, according to a Time magazine/CNN poll.
Top US army intelligence officer admits serious miscalculations (March 31)
http://www.iht.com/articles/91541.html
Rumsfeld's advisors are Pentagon contractors (March 31)
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worldbiz/archives/2003/03/31/200205
Weather window is closing fast
http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=378982003
THE so-called "weather window" for British and US forces in Iraq is closing fast, amid warnings that the onset of some of the world‚s highest temperatures could have a major impact on their effectiveness. Heat exhaustion is likely to impede fighting ability as temperatures climb towards a peak of 43C (109F), while sandstorms decimate visibility .
How far can U.S. military resources stretch? (March 31)
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_np=0&u_pg=54&u_sid=698361
WASHINGTON - With an additional 120,000 troops having been ordered to start moving toward the Persian Gulf, the U.S. military may not have enough soldiers, tanks, warplanes and ships left to deal with a major emergency elsewhere, say in North Korea. Sixty percent of the Marine Corps' power is already deployed overseas, mostly in Iraq. Half the Navy's aircraft carrier battle groups and the bulk of the Air Force's B-1 and B-2 heavy bombers are engaged in the war. Four of 10 15,000-person Army divisions are in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan, and elements of three other divisions are en route to the Persian Gulf.
Unprecedented onslaught on Baghdad (31 March)
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=392458
America unleashed all three types of its hi-tech long-range bombers today in an unprecedented onslaught in and around Baghdad. The US Central Command said the attacks were carried out simultaneously by multiple B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers, adding that it was the first time all three long-range strike aircraft had targeted the same area at the same time.
John Major: Imposing Democracy in Iraq Nearly Impossible
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-12277085,00.html
Le Figaro: Coalition Troops Have Committed Hitler's Mistake
http://english.pravda.ru/main/2003/03/28/45193.html
Baghdad assault 'delayed for up to 40 days'
http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/international.cfm?id=379692003
Bush reportedly shielded from dire Iraq forecast (29 March)
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/5510092.htm
The Miscalculations of Yes-Men (31 March)
http://truthout.org/docs_03/040103A.shtml
It is becoming difficult to tally all of the decisions made by the Bush administration that have turned out to be dead wrong. Walking away from North Korea at the outset of the administration has blossomed into an embarrassing tactical and diplomatic imbroglio with nukes prominently on the table. The massive trillion-dollar tax cut, feted by the administration as an economic cure-all, has become a crushing millstone on the back of an already murderously overburdened federal budget. The decision to withdraw from the Kyoto Treaty, and to be generally disdainful of the international community as a matter of course, led to the utterly humiliating series of diplomatic defeats America has suffered on the matter of Iraq. Little in the last two years of folly can compare, however, to the disastrous miscalculations made by the Bush administration regarding their military attack upon Iraq. This is what the highest members of the administration, as well as opinion-makers favorable to the war, were saying about the ease with which we would take Iraq:
- Vice President Dick Cheney, in an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press" on March 16th, said, "The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but that they want to get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that."
- In an opinion piece for the Washington Post published February 13, 2002, former U.N. ambassador Ken Adelman said, "I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: (1) It was a cakewalk last time; (2) they've become much weaker; (3) we've become much stronger; and (4) now we're playing for keeps."
- Christopher Hitchens, writer for Vanity Fair said on January 28, 2003, "This will be no war -- there will be a fairly brief and ruthless military intervention. The president will give an order. It will be rapid, accurate and dazzling ... It will be greeted by the majority of the Iraqi people as an emancipation. And I say, bring it on."
- Richard Perle, chairman of the powerful Defense Policy Board until his recent resignation amid accusations of financial conflicts of interest, said in a July 11, 2002 PBS interview, "Saddam is much weaker than we think he is. He's weaker militarily. We know he's got about a third of what he had in 1991. But it's a house of cards. He rules by fear because he knows there is no underlying support. Support for Saddam, including within his military organization, will collapse at the first whiff of gunpowder." This is the same Richard Perle who told David Corn in May of 2002 that Iraq could be taken with a light force of 40,000 American troops. "We don't need anyone else," he said.
US Accused Of Using Illegal Cluster Bombs (March 29)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,925167,00.html
Bush's Best Evidence Against Iraq Is Fake
http://rense.com/general36/best.htm
U.S. news criticized for sterility
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/5512120.htm
Practice to Deceive
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0304.marshall.html
Chaos in the Middle East is not the Bush hawks' nightmare scenario--it's their plan
One voice not afraid to air Pentagon's dirty secrets (March 29)
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/28/1048653852785.html
(...) "I did a story a year ago from guys fighting the war [in Afghanistan]. One night they got an order. There was a 10-mile [16-kilometre] air corridor they could not operate in for about a week. It went from Kanduz about 150 miles [240 kilometres] into Pakistan. [Pakistan's President] Musharraf had a few hundred [of his men] training al-Qaeda, including two generals, and he had to get them out. He's our guy, so they flew 'em out. There were 2500 to 4000 people who got out. ... the best [Defence Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld could do was say, 'I don't know anything about it. News to me.' He didn't deny it, and it just slipped by. Where in the hell was Congress on a story like that?"
The Euro And The War On Iraq (3-29-3)
http://rense.com/general36/euro.htm
In November 2000, Iraq began selling its oil for euros, moving away from the post-World War II standard of the US dollar as the currency of international trade. Whilst seen by many at the time as a bizarre act of political defiance, it has proved beneficial for Iraq, with the euro gaining almost 25% against the dollar during 2001. It now costs around USD$1.05 to buy one Euro. Iraq's move towards the euro is indicative of a growing trend. Iran has already converted the majority of its central bank reserve funds to the euro, and has hinted at adopting the euro for all oil sales. On December 7th, 2002, the third member of the axis of evil, North Korea, officially dropped the dollar and began using euros for trade. Venezuela, not a member of the axis of evil yet, but a large oil producer nonetheless, is also considering a switch to the euro. More importantly, at its April 14th, 2002 meeting in Spain, OPEC expressed an interest in leaving the dollar in favour of the euro. If OPEC were to switch to the euro as the standard for oil transactions, it would have serious ramifications for the US economy. Oil-consuming economies would have to flush the dollars out of their central bank holdings and convert them to euros. Some economists estimate that with the market flooded, the US dollar could drop up to 40% in value. As the currency falls, there would be a monetary evacuation by foreign investors abandoning the US stock markets and dollar-denominated assets. Imported products would cost Americans a lot more, and the trade deficit would be magnified. It is foreign demand for the US dollar that funds the US federal budget deficits. Foreign investors flush with dollars typically look to US treasury securities as a means of secure investment. With a large reduction in such investment, the country could potentially go into default. Things could turn very bad, very quickly. In May 2004 an additional 10 member nations will join the European Union. At that point, the EU will represent an oil consumer 33% larger than the United States. In order to mitigate currency risks, the Europeans will increasingly pressure OPEC to trade in euros, and with the EU at that stage buying over half of OPEC oil production, such a change seems likely. This is a scenario that America cannot afford to see eventuate. The US will go to any length to fend off an attempt by OPEC to dump greenbacks as its reserve currency. Attacking Iraq and installing a client regime in Baghdad may have a preventative effect. It will certainly ensure that Iraq returns to using dollars and provide a violent example to any other nation in the region contemplating a migration to the euro. An American-backed junta in Iraq would also enable the US to smash OPEC's hold over oil prices. The US or its client regime could increase Iraqi oil production to levels well beyond OPEC quotas, driving prices down worldwide and weakening the economies of the oil producing nations, thus lessening their likelihood of abandoning the dollar. It would have the short term effect of reducing the profits of domestic oil companies, but the long term effect of securing America's economic hegemony.
Global rallies protest Iraq war (March 30)
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/30/1048962640169.html
Bush's Environmental Strategy: Suppress, Ignore, Preempt
http://www.tompaine.com/feature.cfm/ID/7502
Insects Thrive On GM 'Pest-Killing' Crops
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/environment/story.jsp?story=392044
Congressman Jim McDermott Introduces Depleted Uranium Bill HR 1483 (March 28)
http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/pr030327.html
Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA) today introduced legislation requiring studies on the health and environmental impact of depleted uranium (DU) munitions, as well as cleanup and mitigation of depleted uranium contamination at sites within the United States where DU has been used or produced.
McDermott, a medical doctor, has been concerned about this issue since veterans of the Gulf War started experiencing unexplained illnesses. His concern deepened, he said, after visiting Iraq, where Iraqi pediatricians told him that the incidence of severely deformed infants and childhood cancers has skyrocketed. "Depleted uranium is toxic and carcinogenic and it may well be associated with elevated rates of birth defects in babies born to those exposed to it," said McDermott. "We had troops coming home sick after the Gulf War, and depleted uranium may be one of the factors responsible for that."
CLIP
Congressman Jim McDermott Contact Information: http://www.house.gov/mcdermott/contact.html
Related Articles:
The War Against Ourselves an interview with Dr. Doug Rokke http://www.futurenet.org/25environmentandhealth/rokke.htm
Depleted Uranium: The American Legacy by Sarah DeHart and Louis Farshee
http://www.americaheldhostile.com/ed031503.shtml
It's Time For Answers by Scott Taylor
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/091200-02.htm
1.
From: http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_016.htm
IRAQWAR.RU - March 30 Update
Moscow - No significant changes have been reported during March 29-30 on the Iraqi-US front. Positional combat, sporadic exchange of fire and active search and reconnaissance operations by both sides continue along the entire line of the front.
American troops continue massing near Karabela. As was mentioned in the previous update, the US group of forces in this area numbers up to 30,000 troops, up to 200 tanks and up to 230 helicopters. Latest photos of this area suggest that the [US] troops are busy servicing and repairing their equipment and setting up the support infrastructure.
According to radio intercepts, the coalition commander Gen. Tommy Franks has visited the US forces near Karabela. He personally inspected the troops and had a meeting with the unit commanders. Currently no information is available about the topics discussed during the meeting. However, it is believed that the [coalition] commander listened to the reports prepared by the field commanders and formulated the main objectives for the next 2-3 days.
The current technical shape of the coalition forces was discussed during the meeting at the coalition central headquarters. During a personal phone conversation with another serviceman in the US one participant of this meeting called this technical state "depressing". According to him "...a third of our equipment can be dragged to a junk yard right now. We are holding up only thanks to the round-the-clock maintenance. The real heroes on the front lines are not the Marines but the "ants" from the repair units. If it wasn't for them we'd be riding camels by now..." [Reverse-translated from Russian]
Based on the intercepted radio communications, reports from both sides and other intelligence data, since the beginning of the war the coalition lost 15-20 tanks, around 40 armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, more than 50 military trucks and up to 10 helicopters. In addition to that there have been at least 40 more disabled tanks, about the same number of disabled APCs and IFVs, about 100 disabled wheeled vehicles of all types and around 40 disabled helicopters. These numbers are based on the analysis of non-classified technical reports received daily by the Pentagon.
CLIP
These failed attacked have once again confirmed the fears of the coalition command that the Iraqi forces were much better technically equipped than was believed before the war. In particular, the DIA [US Defense Intelligence Agency] intelligence report from February 2003 insisted that the Iraqi army practically had no night vision equipment except for those systems installed on some tanks and serviceability of even that equipment was questioned. In reality, however, the coalition troops have learned that the Iraqis have an adequate number of night vision surveillance systems and targeting sights even at the squadron level and they know how to properly use this equipment. A particular point of concern [for the coalition] is the fact that most Iraqi night vision systems captured by the coalition are the latest models manufactured in the US and Japan. After analyzing the origins of this equipment the US begun talking about the "Syrian connection". In this regard, the US military experts have analyzed Syria's weapons imports for the past two years and have concluded that in the future fighting [in Iraq] the coalition troops may have to deal with the latest Russian-made anti-tank systems, latest radars and radio reconnaissance systems resistant to the effects electronic counter measures.
CLIP
Certain available information points to a serious conflict between the coalition command and the US political and military leadership. The [US] Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld - the main planner and lobbyist of the military operation against Iraq - accuses the coalition command and Gen. Tommy Franks personally of being passive and indecisive, which [in Rumsfeld's opinion] led to the lengthening of the conflict and the current dead end situation. In his turn Franks in front of his subordinates calls the Secretary of Defense the "old blabbermouth" and an "adventurist" who dragged the army into the war on the most unfavorable terms possible. However, most [US military] officers believe that both military leaders are responsible for the coalition's military failures. Rumsfeld allowed gross errors during the planning of forces and equipment required for the war, while Franks did not show enough strength to get the right forces and the right training for the troops in this campaign and, in essence, surrendered to the whims of the politicians...
CLIP - Read the missing parts at http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_016.htm
2.
From: http://www.prospect.org/authors/kuttner-r.html
While The War Rages, Did You Miss This?
The war in Iraq might not be going quite as smoothly as the Bush administration hoped, but the war at home is going just swimmingly. War is silencing debate not just on the wisdom of Bush's foreign policy but on a host of other issues that would normally be front-page news. You might have missed it, but this is budget season. Thanks to the distractions of war, bizarre budget resolutions are swiftly moving through Congress and will be law by mid-April.
For the first time ever in the United States, we are rushing through an immense tax cut in the midst of a war that the president admits will cost at least $74.7 billion just in its first phase. The consequence of this, not surprisingly, is massive cuts in popular outlays. The budget enacted by the Republican House on a straight-line party vote (with just 12 GOP dissenters) is astonishing. It not only gives Bush his entire tax cut but proposes to balance the budget within six years. The casualties of that process would be monumentally unpopular if the public were not distracted by war.
For starters, the House Republicans are cutting, of all things, veterans benefits. The message, evidently, is God bless our troops when they are dodging bullets but God help them when they come home. Once, a grateful nation offered vets free medical care. Now, the Republicans want to charge premiums to "well-to-do" vets -- with well-to-do defined as earning $26,000 a year. All told, the House budget cuts an amazing $14.6 billion in vets' programs, including money for disabilities caused by war wounds, rehabilitation and health care, pensions for low income veterans, education and housing benefits, and even -- nice touch -- burial benefits. After World War II, we welcomed back vets with a huge program of education, health and housing -- the justly celebrated GI Bill of Rights. This time, returning military personnel will not only face cuts in their own benefits as veterans; their kids will face cuts in education and health aid as well.
One of Bush's signature programs was "No Child Left Behind." The House Republican budget cuts education funding by 10.2 percent below the reduced level proposed by President Bush, which had proposed to cut several billion previously approved by Congress. The Bush administration claims that the war is being fought to make sure weapons of mass destruction will not rain down on Americans. Incredibly, the Republicans are shortchanging the Nunn-Lugar program, the bipartisan effort to dismantle the nuclear arsenal of the former Soviet Union. Which is the bigger threat: Russia's thousands of loose nukes or Saddam's hypothetical ones?
There's more: $93 billion in Medicaid cuts; a skimpy prescription drug program financed by other massive cuts in Medicare; huge environmental cuts. As astonishing as the slap to veterans is a slight cut in real outlays for homeland security -- at a time when threats will increase. There is no new money for port security. Even the administration's "first-responder" initiative comes from cuts in other law enforcement aid. Though the war serves as a handy distraction, these budget assaults are not mainly the result of war. Mainly they go to pay for the cost of tax cuts.
The final cost of the war, occupation and rebuilding may reach $200 billion. The cost of the two Bush tax cuts is over $3 trillion. (In a preliminary vote, the Senate voted yesterday to trim Bush's latest tax cut by $350 billion, but this still would have to be reconciled with the House.) This administration's slogan might as well be, "Sacrifice is for suckers."
While young men and women risk their lives in a war whose rationale remains to be proven, the larger Bush program diverts money from services to ordinary Americans, even our homeland security -- to give tax breaks to multimillionaires.
CLIP - Read the rest at http://www.prospect.org/authors/kuttner-r.html
3.
From: http://www.DollarsAndSense.org
The U.S. Military's War On The Earth
by Bob Feldman, Dollars and Sense, March 13, 2003
In this era of "permanent war," the U.S. war machine bombards civilians in places like Serbia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. It also makes "war on the Earth," both at home and abroad. The U.S. Department of Defense is, in fact, the world's largest polluter, producing more hazardous waste per year than the five largest U.S.chemical companies combined. Washington's Fairchild Air Force Base, the number one producer of hazardous waste among domestic military bases, generated over 13 million pounds of waste in 1997 (more than the weight of the Eiffel Tower's iron structure). Oklahoma's Tinker Air Force Base, the top toxic waste emitter, released over 600,000 pounds in the same year (the same amount of water would cover an entire football field about two inches deep).
Just about every U.S. military base and nuclear arms facility emits toxics into the environment. At many U.S. military target ranges, petroleum products and heavy metals used in bombs and bullets contaminate the soil and groundwater. And since the Pentagon operates its bases as "federal reservations," they are usually beyond the reach of local and state environmental regulations. Local and state authorities often do not find out the extent of the toxic contamination until after a base is closed down.
Active and abandoned military bases have released toxic pollution from Cape Cod to San Diego, Alaska to Hawaii. In June 2001, the Military Toxics Project and the Environmental Health Coalition released the report Defend Our Health: A People's Report to Congress detailing the Pentagon's war on the Earth in the United States and Puerto Rico. The contaminants emitted from military bases include pesticides, solvents, petroleum, lead, mercury, and uranium. The health effects for the surrounding communities are devastating: miscarriages, low birth weights, birth defects, kidney disease, and cancer.
See: http://www.miltoxproj.org/magnacarta/DefendOurHealthReport.html
Even the Defense Department itself now acknowledges some of the environmental destruction wrought by the U.S. military world-wide. The Pentagon's own Inspector General documented, in a 1999 report, pollution at U.S.bases in Canada, Germany, Great Britain, Greenland, Iceland, Italy, Panama, the Philippines, South Korea, Spain, and Turkey. Again, since even U.S. military bases abroad are treated as U.S.territory, the installations typically remain exempt from the environmental authority of the host country.
Activists worldwide have called attention to the scourge of toxic pollution, target-range bombardment, noise pollution, abandoned munitions, and radioactive waste unleashed by the United States. The International Grassroots Summit on Military Bases Cleanup in 1999 brought together 70 representatives of citizen groups affected by U.S. military contamination. The gathering adopted an "Environmental Bill of Rights for Persons, Indigenous Peoples, Communities and Nations Hosting Foreign and Colonial Military Bases," declaring that past and present military bases "threaten health, welfare, and the environment, [as well as] future generations." The document emphasizes that the burden of environmental destruction has fallen disproportionately on "economically disadvantaged communities, women, children, people of color and indigenous people." And it demands that the "foreign and colonial" armed forces responsible for the contamination bear the costs the cleanup."
Yet until the era of "permanent war" and global U.S. militarism gives way to an era of world peace, the U.S. military machine will likely remain above the law. And the Pentagon will continue its war on the Earth unabated.
Bob Feldman is a Dollars & Sense collective member. This article appears in the current issue of Dollars & Sense, the Magazine of Economic Justice --in a 1-MB PDF of the military's environmental destruction around the globe.
4.
The Nando Times:
Scientists wary of Bush bioweapons plan
By PAUL ELIAS, AP Biotechnology Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (March 28, 2003) - A Bush administration program to add at least three bioweapons labs is troubling many scientists and arms control experts, who say it can't be good to train more microbiologists in the black art of bioterror.
The field is suddenly awash with billions of dollars to combat bioterrorism and much more is promised under President Bush's Project BioShield plan. The money will fund a building boom of at least three new airtight laboratories where scientists in space suits handle the world's deadliest diseases.
At least six universities and the New York State Department of Health are competing for contracts to build one or two labs, where scientists can infect research monkeys and other animals with such lethal agents as the Ebola, Marburg and Lassa viruses. Those African hemorrhagic diseases are often fatal and always painful, marked by severe bleeding.
They'll also likely create new classes of toxins - including genetically engineered ones - as part of the process of constructing weapons they want to defeat. Developing antidotes or vaccines for those toxins might take years.
"It's perversely increasing the risk of exposure," said Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University chemistry professor and bioweapons expert who believes one additional lab is all that is needed.
Ebright and others believe labs managed by universities could prove less secure than government facilities, which have had their own security lapses.
Many believe the anthrax attacks that killed five people and briefly paralyzed Capitol Hill in 2001 were launched by a scientist with access to one of the government's high-security facilities - called Biosafety Level 4 labs, or BSL-4 for short.
Federal investigators searched a former apartment of one such microbiologist, Steven Hatfill, but never stated publicly that he was a suspect. Hatfill has denied involvement.
In his state of the union speech in January, President Bush called for nearly $6 billion to make vaccines and treatments against potential bioterror pathogens. The National Institutes of Health bioterrorism budget, meanwhile, has increased 500 percent this year to $1.3 billion - a large part of which will be used to build at least three labs.
Government officials and leaders of universities vying for the bioterrorism largesse are unapologetic.
NIH officials say that only two of the five U.S. facilities equipped do such work are effectively in use today, and they're overburdened. One is at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta - the only place in the United States that handles live smallpox.
The other full-scale lab is the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Maryland's Fort Detrick. The government is already going ahead with additional labs at Fort Detrick and in Hamilton, Mont.
"What we have is not adequate to meet the current biodefense efforts," said Rona Hirschberg of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease.
Officials said they don't know how many scientists work in the biosafety labs, but that the number is tiny and many more trained researchers are needed.
One of the byproducts of such endeavors will be the study of emerging diseases like the West Nile virus, which has infected 4,000 people and killed 274.
"The emerging diseases that we have to deal with are intense," said Virginia Hinshaw, provost of the University of California-Davis, which hopes to build one of the new labs. "The public health need is very large."
But mistrust runs deep, especially in the California college town of Davis. Lobbied intensely by vocal residents, the city council voted to oppose the school's application to build a lab.
The Davis protests reached a crescendo in February with the escape of a lab monkey, which is still missing. Davis officials said it was disease-free and probably now dead. Still, the school's $200 million bid for a BSL-4 lab has been jeopardized.
Government officials insist that the labs will be secure and serve only defensive purposes. But the U.S. military has a history of dabbling in biological agent programs that push up against a 30-year-old international treaty banning them.
Most recently, it was revealed that researchers at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have been developing anthrax for use in testing biological defense systems.
SUBSCRIPTION TO THE EARTH RAINBOW NETWORK MEDIA LIST
If you would like to subscribe to the Earth Rainbow Network automated Media listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, simply send a blank email at media-subscribe@lists.riseup.net from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!
