Panel: biological attack likely by 2013

[JM15 386]

From Associated Press.....

Panel warns biological attack likely by 2013

By PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – The United States can expect a terrorist attack using nuclear or more likely biological weapons before 2013, reports a bipartisan commission in a study being briefed Tuesday to Vice President-elect Joe Biden. It suggests the Obama administration bolster efforts to counter and prepare for germ warfare by terrorists.

"Our margin of safety is shrinking, not growing," states the report, obtained by The Associated Press. It is scheduled to be publicly released Wednesday.

The commission is also encouraging the new White House to appoint one official on the National Security Council to exclusively coordinate U.S. intelligence and foreign policy on combating the spread of nuclear and biological weapons.

The report of the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism, led by former Sens. Bob Graham of Florida and Jim Talent of Missouri, acknowledges that terrorist groups still lack the needed scientific and technical ability to make weapons out of pathogens or nuclear bombs. But it warns that gap can be easily overcome, if terrorists find scientists willing to share or sell their know-how.

"The United States should be less concerned that terrorists will become biologists and far more concerned that biologists will become terrorists," the report states.

Edited December 7, 2008 by Chris192
Compliance with copyright policy

[Guest SQUADco119]

Biological weapons? F**cking scary . Nothing else to say other than I hope Our goverment takes the appropriate measures to help prevent this.

[gamewell45 258]

Guess i'll keep my gas mask handy.

[ex-commish 490]

If I am not mistaken, what was highlighted in this report is nothing new. Every WMD class I have taken or article I have read has clearly spelled out that bioligical weapons will become the prefered means of killing mass amounts of people.

[JM15 386]

HFD, I think that what they were trying to show was that people especially the general public are almost in a false sense of security. They were also highlighting that maybe more preparation is needed to prevent and mitigate these types of attacks.

[ex-commish 490]

HFD, I think that what they were trying to show was that people especially the general public are almost in a false sense of security. They were also highlighting that maybe more preparation is needed to prevent and mitigate these types of attacks.

Thanks for sending me the info.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

If I am not mistaken, what was highlighted in this report is nothing new. Every WMD class I have taken or article I have read has clearly spelled out that bioligical weapons will become the prefered means of killing mass amounts of people.

There actually has been some debate on how heavy the federal WMD curriculums hit on Biological weapons and what some others in the field actually deem what the biggest threat is. Many believe that explosives are the highest threat, which based on history could be deemed pretty accurate and also is one of the lightest topics in some curriculums. With that said it must also be kept in mind that we have to have the mindset that it could be anything.

[antiquefirelt 994]

If I am not mistaken, what was highlighted in this report is nothing new. Every WMD class I have taken or article I have read has clearly spelled out that bioligical weapons will become the prefered means of killing mass amounts of people.

I agree the report has she no new light for those of us who have any basic knowledge in this field. But, I'm not sure I agree that they're the preferred method. Most accounts show that while biological attack has a significant "fear factor" in the general populace, the ability to weaponize biological bacteria and viruses is much more difficult. We probably should fear MRSA more than a true biological attack. As ALS notes, explosives are still likely preferable as their easy to make, store, ship and detonate in comparison. Remember that for a terrorist to be successful they need only play on our fears, large loss of life is not always the only way. This is one reason there is still concern about attacks in America's Heartland. If we start to feel we're not safe anywhere, then they will have the upper hand. I know right now, through tons of meeting and conferences, "rural" America (atleast up here) thinks terrorism is a NYC, LA, Chicago problem. No one wants to see it happen, but they have little concern it will take place at a local level far from Metropolis.

[ny10570 745]

No matter what the next attack is, the attack isn't the problem. The perfect example is the Anthrax attacks in 2001. It killed 5 people and maybe 20 more. Yet depts are still going out on powder runs 7 years after the last victim was discovered. Some african making handmade sheep skin drum heads catches anthrax and it made headlines.

A couple years ago some kid drove around the mid-west putting pipe bombs in mail boxes because he wanted his attacks to look like a smiley face on the US map. He had people all over middle america sealing up or just plain removing their mailboxes even though he only killed one person.

On average vending machines kill just over 2 people a year. Hot water from the tap kills close to 100 a year. The perception of fear is vastly more dangerous than the actual fear and that is how we are really going to suffer after the next attack.

Edited December 2, 2008 by ny10570