No way this could happen in the USA

[garlicguy]

It is a great thing that we can trust our government to protect us at all times, against all enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC.

Otherwise, this goofy little YouTube clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrJcmdMfkwQ) could make some people begin to doubt, or at least wonder.... :question:

[Rhino]

1. This ain't the 50's

2. Bacillus subtilis is not dangerous. That's why they used it.

[garlicguy]

1. This ain't the 50's

True, and right. (We have heard about smallpox in blankets for the Indians, radiation exposure for our troops during atom bomb tests, and various other atrocities performed on US Military and civilians in the past though, have we not?)

Which leads me to wonder if our governmental scientists at that time were absolutely certain that:

2. Bacillus subtilis is not dangerous. That's why they used it.


Just food (or penicillin) for thought you know...

[Rhino]

At the time, they were certain. In fact, even today....

B. subtilis is considered a benign organism as it does not possess traits that cause disease. It is not considered pathogenic or toxigenic to humans, animals, or plants.http://www.epa.gov/oppt/biotech/pubs/fra/fra009.htm

They weren't testing bio-weapons on U.S. citizens, as the Youtube link says. They were merely using a benign substance to test how a bio-weapon might be spread, if someone were ever inclined to do so.

[garlicguy]

:smirky: Hey Rhino! That link is to an EPA.gov site! :smirky:

Sorry. Don't trust 'em much. They're all a pack of liars which they've proved over, and over, and over again. Besides which, the B. subtilis drop was the timp of the iceburg in that clip.

[Rhino]

Is this one better?

Dr. Rothschild backed up his point by telling us the story of the discovery of the Bacillus subtilis, a bacterial microorganism that is commonly found in the environment rather than in humans, yet is well known by modern science to be very friendly to the human system. It can promote dramatic healing benefits in humans, even though it isn't one of the native microbes that normally inhabit the human body.http://www.rense.com/general4/bac.htm

[garlicguy]

Thanks, Rhino! I'm feeling safer already! :D

Yes. Much better.

Any comment(s) on the rest of the video?

[Rhino]

Or these:

http://www.sunysccc.edu/academic/mst/microbes/11bsubt.htm
http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/cgi-bin/omd?bacillus+subtilis
http://www.smelly-feet-no-more.com/Bacillus_Subtilis.html

[Rhino]

I don't remember the rest of it. What was it?

[garlicguy]

Well, I thought it was the whole of:


this goofy little YouTube clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrJcmdMfkwQ)

[Rhino]

Okay, I watched it again.

Re the San Fran incident, the Navy was doing the same thing, testing the spread of a material they thought was harmless (serratia marcescens). They later discovered it wasn't so harmless. Same as with the early nuke tests.

The CIA incident has little to no verifiable facts.

The Army incident in New York also has few facts available, but it basically surrounds negligence with inadequate animal testing before progressing to human testing. The fact that they apparently disguised the nature of the injections was unforgiveable, hence the lawsuits that resulted. However, the fact that the Army later voluntarily informed the families without ever being prompted to do so pretty much refutes the notion that they have no regard for the safety of civilians. This was just an example of a few rogue individuals who were not representative of the Army as a whole. The same would hold true for any large group, including society as a whole. There will always be some bad apples. It is in no way indicative of a systemic or widespread acceptance of such behavior toward the populace, either military or civilian. Trying to extrapolate that to the military or to the government as a whole would be like saying the actions of Jeffrey Dahmer were indicative of the behavior of all white males.