Some interesting Anthrax and bioterroisms facts

[Guest guest]

This is long but since we are on the subject this is very good and

sums things up in a way that makes allot of sense, so worth the read

to anyone worrying about this anthrax scare.

Hugs to all

An 'insiders' view of the problems created by toxic terrorism for

business

and the media.

>From Little Things Big Things Grow

On the 25th of September you read here of the potential threat

posed to

Western interests by non-nuclear weapons of mass destruction.

Discussion of

the threat from chemical and biological weapons is entirely

reasonable,

given that such weapons have been used on a number of occasions in

the past

100 years and even so-called civilised countries have admitted

to both

possessing and stockpiling such weapons.

There have, thus far, been three separate reported instances of

people

coming into contact with the biotoxin Anthrax in the US in the wake

of the

September 11 attacks. In Boca Raton, Florida, one person has died and

eight

others have been reported as infected. All were associated with

the same

media outlet. That form of Anthrax was a strain which infects its

victims

through inhalation into the respiratory system. The source

of this

contamination is presently unclear. Authorities are, however,

concerned

that the incident occurred in a location very near to where some

of the

September 11 terrorists learned to fly and that a terrorist cell is

still

active in the area.

The recent New York incident involving Anthrax at the NBC

office in

Manhattan allegedly involved what authorities described as

a 'cutaneous'

version of the pathogen. That is, one where infection is picked up

by the

skin. This contamination was allegedly delivered as a brown

powder in a

letter received as long ago as 25 September and allegedly addressed

to NBC

anchorman Tom Brokaw.

In the third incident, a letter was received by US software giant

Microsoft

at its office in the Reno, Nevada. At this time is in unclear to

whom the

letter was addressed or when it was mailed, but it appears to have

been in

an envelope returned from a Microsoft vendor in Malaysia.

There have even been four reported instances possibly involving

powder-form

Anthrax in Sydney Australia overnight, although each proved, in the

end, to

be a false alarm.

US and Australian authorities have been at pains to play down any

panic

that this might be part of a co-ordinated terrorist attack. US

authorities

instead initially cited the possibility of some form of 'copy-cat'

attack

while Australian authorities simply withheld any comment.

While 'copy cat'

attack is still a remote possibility, this is highly

unlikely. Calm

analysis of the incidents not only points the finger at

terrorists, but

also reveals both possible future directions for the terrorists

and also

key information about their strengths and weaknesses.

What does this all mean?

It is reasonable to rule out coincidence. While the attacks in

Florida, New

York and Nevada all involved Anthrax, it is interesting that

there were

different strains involved in New York and Nevada. The more deadly

strain

is that inhaled through the respiratory system. Yet reports

indicate that

this form was only found in Florida. What does this tell us? While

is it

possible that there are two groups involved, it is unlikely. So

it is

reasonable to infer that the group involved has access to at

least two

strains of Anthrax. While the public may not know what to make of

this, it

is entirely likely that the Intelligence Community should be able

infer a

number of things.

It needs to be recognised that, regardless of the claims arising

out of

September 11, that attack was not particularly sophisticated.

True, it

required considerable co-ordination and financial backing ? but it

was not

sophisticated. At least, it was not sophisticated in the same

technical

sense as biological warfare is sophisticated. Therefore, while Al

Qaida may

well have had the wherewithal to mount the September 11 attack,

there is

absolutely no indication that it could either research or

produce

biological pathogens such as Anthrax ? let alone two different

strains and

on a scale sufficient to pose a realistic threat as a weapon

of 'mass'

destruction.

It is therefore likely that the group obtained the pathogen from

sources

outside the network. The old USSR is a possible source, through

dealings

with either the Russian Mafia, corrupt officials or Islamic

supporters

within the Russian military or state security apparatus. The

other

alternative is that there is a sponsoring state behind this phase

of the

terror campaign. If this is the case, then the finger of blame

rests

comfortably with Iraq in the first instance.

If there is a sponsoring state, then regardless of its identity,

it is

unlikely to provide Al Qaida with anything more than token access

to such

weapons of mass destruction. To hand over substantive access to any

weapon

of mass destruction is to give Osama Bin Laden power which might

well come

back to bite the sponsor fatally. Besides, neither Saddam

Hussein, nor

anyone else in the region likely to have access to Anthrax, has

shown any

inclination to share power with anyone else to date. However,

giving Bin

Laden token quantities of a biotoxin such as Anthrax would serve a

number

of purposes to the benefit of a terrorism-sponsoring state such as

Iraq.

It would allow the state to test its pathogen in something

approximating

the real world while avoiding a full-blown war. Just as the US and

the USSR

used to test nuclear weapons to determine their effectiveness, so too

there

is a need to test other weapons of mass destruction for the same

reasons.

Giving a small amount to someone with a total absence of

conscience like

Bin Laden is an arguably sound strategy for testing such a weapons at

arm's

length from both the event and the results.

While Iraq is by no means the only suspect as a sponsoring

state, it

remains the chief suspect. The advantages for Iraq include the

opportunity

to hit back at the US for the past decade of humiliation since

the Gulf

War. It would also allow Iraq to send a message to the US intended to

deter

future US military adventurism in the Gulf while

retaining 'plausible

deniability'.

What does it infer about the perpetrators?

First, while the perpetrators have access to a weapon of mass

destruction,

they appear to have, at least for the present, no access to a

means of

delivering sufficient quantities of the weapon to actually

effect mass

destruction. There is also a strong possibility that they lack

access to

sufficient quantities to mount anything more than a token attack. The

Tokyo

subway Sarin gas attack by Aum Shinrikyo showed the devastating

effects

that delivering a weapon of mass destruction can have through

simply

releasing it in a crowded venue. Similar scenarios have been

proffered for

biological weapons in recent years. Yet the perpetrators in this

case have

chosen to target individuals as victims. Is this the first phase, or

is it

really the limit of their current capability?

A preliminary analysis of the victimology in these events shows

that each

genuine Anthrax event was, if successful, likely to become

public news

quickly ? targeted as they were against a media outlet, a national

media

personality and the high profile Microsoft. This is entirely

consistent

with the purpose of terrorism ? to create the maximum public

fear from

minimal force. This is also arguably a pointer to a lack of reserves

to do

any large-scale damage.

The advantage for the terrorists of targeting the media with even

token

quantities of Anthrax is that, regardless of statements by

authorities, the

terrorists are able to evoke a level of public panic. Panic

arises from

fear. Fear equates with terror. So even a token attack causes terror

out of

proportion to the actual threat.

An inevitable consequence of such any public panic about biotoxin

attack is

an increase in false alarms as people start to have visions of

Anthrax

spores in every strange letter or parcel. Such reactions will

inevitably

cause authorities around the world to spread their already-

stretched

biohazard management resources even more thinly through having to

respond

seriously to each such alarm ? false or otherwise. This further

stretching

of resources will inevitably be noticed by the press and brought

to the

attention of the public. It follows that the public will lose

further

confidence in the capacity of authorities to deal with the

situation. This

ultimately increases the impact of the terror associated with the

attack.

While some argue that Bin Laden and his Al Qaida are rabid lunatics,

there

appears to be a very calculated plan behind what is happening.

That plan

may well recognise the limits of terror and the need to retain

public

support in the Islamic world. It is one thing to launch American

airliners

at the WTC ? both symbols of alleged American imperialism. It

would be

something entirely different to make a mass release of a biotoxin

amongst

the US population. There would be a real gamble associated with the

likely

fallout from such an attack.

While there were clearly a number of Moslems who lost their

lives on

September 11, a mass biotoxin attack on the US would inevitably lead

to far

more Moslems losing their lives ? even if they were Amercian Moslems!

Would

Bin Laden lose support? Probably not amongst the fundamentalist

fringe of

Islam. But there is a much stronger likelihood of support

deserting him

from amongst the majority of Islamic moderates, many of who still

appear to

be sitting on the fence.

The other unplayed card in this scenario is implicit threat in

statements

made by Bush Administration hardliners ? that they will use whatever

means

is necessary to deal with the threat. Implicit in this position is

that a

large-scale attack on the US using a weapon of mass destruction

may well

elicit a response in kind.

The US is now the only world superpower. It continues to maintain a

nuclear

arsenal unequalled. While the Taliban would like to resist the

US, the

question remains just how far they would be willing to test US

patience by

allowing Bin Laden to bring them into the first nuclear

conflagration of

the 21st Century. I suspect the answer to that question would be

found in

Bin Laden's lifeless body on the door step of the US Embassy in

Islamabad

early one morning - no note of explanation attached and no note

necessary!

So, even if Bin Laden does have access to a stockpile of Anthrax,

expect

any biotoxin campaign to be more one of individual harassment

intent on

provoking further disproportionate terror, rather than any attempt

at mass

poisoning of a city population in the US or elsewhere.