Search this site

Bio-Terror Agents

    England Foot & Mouth Attacks (2007)

    BIOTERRORBIBLE.COM: The following state/government sponsored bio-terror attacks occurred in England a few years after the terror attacks of 7/7. The historical record of state sponsored bio-terror is littered with unprovoked attacks on unsuspecting soldiers and citizens alike. The fact that state sponsored bio-terror tests (attacks) exist in mass confirms not only that government is the serial bio-terrorist, but that it will strike again in the near future.

    Currently, Israel is the only modern nation that has not signed the 1972
    Biological Weapons Convention  (refusal to engage in offensive biological warfare, stockpiling, and use of biological weapons). Also, Israel is the only modern nation that has signed but not ratified the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (refusal to produce, stockpile and use chemical weapons). Should the world suffer a major bio-terror attack or pandemic, Israel will be the #1 suspect.

    Title:
    Foot-And-Mouth Disease
    Date:
    2012
    Source:
    Wikipedia

    Abstract: Foot-and-mouth disease or hoof-and-mouth disease (Aphtae epizooticae) is an infectious and sometimes fatal viral disease that affects cloven-hoofed animals, including domestic and wild bovids. The virus causes a high fever for two or three days, followed by blisters inside the mouth and on the feet that may rupture and cause lameness.

    Foot-and-mouth disease is a severe plague for animal farming, since it is highly infectious and can be spread by infected animals through aerosols, through contact with contaminated farming equipment, vehicles, clothing or feed, and by domestic and wild predators. Its containment demands considerable efforts in vaccination, strict monitoring, trade restrictions and quarantines, and occasionally the elimination of millions of animals.

    Susceptible animals include cattle, water buffalo, sheep, goats, pigs, antelope, deer, and bison. It has also been known to infect hedgehogs, elephants, llama, and alpaca may develop mild symptoms, but are resistant to the disease and do not pass it on to others of the same species. In laboratory experiments, mice and rats and chickens have been successfully infected by artificial means, but it is not believed that they would contract the disease under natural conditions. Humans are very rarely affected.

    The virus responsible for the disease is a picornavirus, the prototypic member of the genus Aphthovirus. Infection occurs when the virus particle is taken into a cell of the host. The cell is then forced to manufacture thousands of copies of the virus, and eventually bursts, releasing the new particles in the blood. The virus is highly variable, which limits the effectiveness of vaccination (Wikipedia, 2012)

    Title:
    Foot And Mouth Virus Released From Government Lab
    Date: August 5, 2007
    Source: Infowars

    Abstract:
    The strain of foot and mouth disease that has put Britain on high alert has been identified as originating from a government laboratory which is shared with an American pharmaceutical company, mirroring the deadly outbreak of 2001 and potentially signaling a new wave of agraterrorism intended to cripple the farming community.

    New Prime Minister Gordon Brown has chaired two Cobra emergency meetings and farmers nationwide have been ordered to halt movements of all livestock in response to the situation after after foot-and-mouth was confirmed at Wolford farm, near Guildford, on Friday night.

    As was the case in 2001, when a vial of foot and mouth virus that was "stolen" from a government bio-weapons laboratory caused untold misery for thousands of farmers and devastated the industry, the origin of the latest outbreak traces directly back to a government research facility.

    The strain in infected cattle is identical to that used for vaccines at the Institute for Animal Health at Pirbright, three miles from the farm," reports the BBC .

    The strain was used in a vaccine batch manufactured on 16 July by a private pharmaceutical company Merial Animal Health.

    The firm shares Pirbright with the government's Institute for Animal Health (IAH), which conducts research into foot-and-mouth and where the strain is also present.

    Merial Animal Health is an American pharmaceutical company that manufactures foot and mouth vaccines containing live virus and is already being blamed as "responsible for the foot and mouth outbreak in Britain" by some newspapers.

    Whether the culprits are the pharmaceutical company or the government research lab, serious questions need to be asked about why routine levels of bio-security were not followed and how the virus managed to escape. Press speculation that the virus became airborne and got out through the air ducts doesn't comport with the basic composition of vaccines and how they would normally be stored.

    For those who doubt the veracity of a British government plot to once again eviscerate the livelihoods of farmers (routinely the biggest power block opposing the Labour government) in an act of agraterrorism, they should carefully consider what happened in 2001. The Sunday Express reported that the foot and mouth virus was released deliberately out of Porton Down bio-weapons facility and could have possibly been the source of the outbreak two months later.

    The disease spread like wildfire throughout the country as many accused the government of not doing nearly enough to contain it and the spring of 2001 in England was characterized by apocalyptic images of burning pyres dotted all over the countryside as over four million animals were slaughtered.

    Coupled with reports of the government making inquiries to timber merchants and sign makers (before closing public footpaths), it is inconceivable that an animal rights activist, as we are led to believe, could have penetrated a level 4 bio-weapons facility that also houses anthrax and ebola and is protected by armed guards of the Ministry of Defence Police and the Military Provost Guard Service. The individual who stole the vial must have had full security clearance to enter the facility. Why would an animal rights activist release a virus that would kill four million animals?

    Patricia Doyle, PhD also reported that Foot and Mouth exercises were being run by the British government immediately before the outbreak was made public.

    Experts are saying that the current outbreak is likely to be localized and we can only hope it remains this way, because Brown won't hesitate to turn huge swathes of the country into quarantine zones as a dry run for martial law just as his predecessor Tony Blair did six years ago (Infowars, 2005).

    Title: Foot And Mouth Released In Agraterrorism Attack On UK?
    Date:
    August 5, 2007
    Source:
     Infowars

    Abstract:  Why would a top secret lab, Porton Down, keep a benign virus, like simple FMD, in a biolevel 4 unit with SMALLPOX, EBOLA, ANTHRAX, and a very VIRULENT and, I suspect, ALTERED STRAIN OF TB? Why? FMD virus is usually kept in biolevel 3 unit.

    So, why is this one, the one that had been stolen from this high security, top secret facility, so different that it must be kept in level 4 with bioweapon pathogens? Have they discovered HOW to make FMD jump the species barrier?

    I am now 100% certain that:

    1. FMD was released on purpose in the UK.
    2. The FMD virus released in the UK was from the stolen vile from Porton Downs, and it is GENETICALLY ALTERED, weaponized, and probably highly unstable. Ergo, the mass culling of all animals.
    3. MAFF Officials, as well as Porton Down scientists probably do not know how the stolen virus will react in the environment. I believe that this version of the FMD virus can probably travel a lot further then non- engineered versions. I also believe that this version may be able to jump the species barrier to man.
    4. This strain can become a very lethal killer to humans.

    Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus (FMDV) Why is the FMD outbreak in the UK different?

    I have been saying that the Foot-and-Mouth Disease outbreak in the UK has some anomalies that make it different from the other Foot-and-Mouth Disease outbreaks around the world.

    We first learned about an outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease in the UK, February 20, 2001. The origin of Foot and Mouth Disease virus was traced to Bob Waugh's "Burnisde Farm" in Heddon-on-the-Wall, UK. Bob Waugh's "Burnside Farm" was confirmed by Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF)to be the origin of the Foot-and-Mouth Disease outbreak in the UK.

    There were certain oddities pertaining to Mr. Waugh's farm. The Burnside Farm was filthy, with cramped animal pens, some of which contained dead animals scattered throughout the pen with live animals. In short, Bob Waugh's "Burnside Farm" was a perfect "ground zero" for an outbreak. December 19, 200, Bob Waugh's farm was visited by Animal Rights Activists, and also by Mr. Martin Coutts, who is a Press Officer for Hillside Animal Sanctuary in Norwich, UK.

    When I spoke to Mr. Martin Coutts on the telephone last week, he informed me that he had visited Bob Waugh's farm in December because he, and his associates feared Foot-and-Mouth Disease might occur. The visit was two months prior to the Feb. 20, 2001 outbreak. I would concur that his fears were realized.

    Three months prior to the Foot-and-Mouth Disease outbreak in the UK, the US held Foot-and-Mouth Disease simulations in Texas. I have been told by Paula McCann, a Producer for an overnight BBC radio show, called "Up All Night," that the UK had also held Foot-and-Mouth Disease Simulations just prior to the actual outbreak.

    Foot-and-Mouth disease is a non-lethal virus in the family Picornavirus of the genus Aphaviridae. It is really only lethal to young and newborn animals. It carries less then a 5% death rate for those animals. It does result in loss of productivity for older animals who had contracted the virus. Animals who have had the virus do not maintain body weight, and females experience a major loss in milk.

    There are also major problems for Countries with active Foot-and-Mouth Disease status. These Countries are unable to export livestock or livestock products. The disease is really a major economical blow to a Country that has endemic, and active Foot- and-Mouth Disease.

    There are several vaccines available to prevent Foot-and-Mouth Disease, but, there is also a major downside to using these vaccines. Synthetic marker vaccines for FMD are still at the developmental stage. Vaccines can, occasionally, be contaminated with live virus, thus the vaccine can cause a FMD outbreak.

    Vaccinated animals may be difficult to distinguish serologically from previously-infected animals thus eliminating serology as a method of identifying infected animals. In the case of an active outbreak, such as presently in the UK, attempts to "emergency vaccinate" animals, the vaccination teams can spread disease as they make rounds from farm to farm. Lastly, vaccinated animals may become infected, and show less severe signs of disease, despite shedding virus, thus prolonging an outbreak by allowing infected animals to escape ready visual detection. One other problem is that vaccinated animals will show FMD virus antibodies and thus, endanger a Country's FMD-free status.

    There is also another anomaly about the UK outbreak. The UK is the ONLY Country that is doing mass culling of all animals, both healthy and ill.

    Other Countries where FMD is endemic or has broken out, only cull sick animal herds. In some cases, only animals at risk, within 2 miles of the outbreak might be culled. The policy of the UK is to cull all animals, healthy as well as sick.

    I have learned from my sources in the UK that MAFF had purchased much of the wood, prior to the outbreak, that is now being used for funeral pyres. How did MAFF officials KNOW that they would need the extra wood for funeral pyres caused by an outbreak of FMD, that had not occurred at the time the wood was purchased?

    IF you watch the evening news over the past two months, then I am sure that you have seen tourists coming from the UK entering the US swiping their feet in disinfectant. Even luggage had to be disinfected. We have been told that Foot and Mouth Disease type O had been pandemic.

    We see ONLY WITNESS-TOURISTS FROM THE UK being disinfected. India has had an outbreak of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus that had merged with hemorrhagic septicemia, yet, we do not see Indian or Bangladesh tourists having to disinfect their shoes when entering the US. Why only tourists and visitors from the UK? Is there anything "different" about the strain of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus in the UK?

    Lastly, according to Monday's article in the UK Daily Mirror, a test tube of Foot and Mouth Disease virus had been stolen from the Porton Downs top secret labs in the UK. It was reported that the FMDV was kept in the same biolevel 4 unit as Smallpox, Ebola, Anthrax and a very virulent strain of TB. Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus is normally kept in biolevel 3 unit.

    What is so different about the stolen FMD virus?

    1. Why did this vile of FMD virus have to be kept in level 4 unit with Smallpox, Ebola, Anthrax and Virulent TB?
    2. Was this FMD virus genetically altered?
    3. Has it been altered to merge easily with other viruses, such as hemorrhagic septicemia?
    4. Who took the vile and where is it?
    5. Is this the Foot-and-Mouth virus causing the UK outbreak?
    6. Is there any other pathogen missing from that same unit? Smallpox, Ebola, TB, or Anthrax?
    7. Why would someone only take a virus that is not even lethal to animals? Or is it? (Infowars, 2007).

    Title: Foot-And-Mouth 'May Be Contained'
    Date: August 10, 2007
    Source: BBC

    Abstract
    The foot-and mouth outbreak is unlikely to have spread outside Surrey, the government has announced.

    Meanwhile, the BBC has learned that initial tests at a farm outside the existing 10km (6.2 mile) surveillance zone are negative.

    Two farms near Guildford have tested positive for the disease, while animals culled at a third inside the zone did not have foot-and-mouth, Defra said.

    Gordon Brown has said the UK is "open for business" following the outbreak.

    'Clinical Suspicion'

    The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said Hunts Hill Farm inside the surveillance zone, where 362 cows, sheep, pigs and goats were destroyed as a precautionary measure, did not have the disease.

    Farmer John Emerson voiced his frustration after it was confirmed the slaughtered animals were not infected.

    He said: "When we first heard the herds next door to ours were infected we thought it was inevitable ours would get it too.

    "But knowing now that my animals were never infected makes it worse."

    There was "clinical suspicion" of foot-and-mouth at a farm at Wotton, near Dorking.

    The farm is outside the surveillance zone but a 3km (1.8 mile) temporary protection zone has been put in place.

    Government sources have told the BBC a second batch of results from the Wotton farm are likely to be available later on Friday.

    Earlier, Laurence Matthews, who leases the farm, said he was "absolutely sure" his cattle did not have foot-and-mouth, but he called a vet as a precaution.

    'Infection Restricted'

    Chief veterinary officer Debby Reynolds briefed reporters on an interim report into the outbreak.

    She said: "It sets out that the most likely scenario is that the infection will be restricted to the Surrey area. But it does set out alternatives."

    The report also found the most likely source of the outbreak was the nearby Pirbright lab site, used by vaccine manufacturer Merial and the state-run Institute for Animal Health.

    Ms Reynolds added: "It concludes that the risk of spread of infection out of Surrey through undisclosed infection in sheep during the risk period is very low.

    "And this report - and it's an interim, initial report - sets out the most likely scenario that whilst there is a risk of further outbreaks in the same area, it is unlikely that infection from the original release of virus will occur.

    "However, further cases could occur through secondary spread."

    She also said a programme of vaccination would not be carried out but the situation would be reviewed daily.

    Compensation Payments

    Prime Minister Mr Brown said everything was being done to get the UK back to normal outside the restricted zones.

    Restrictions on taking animals to abattoirs have been lifted but many movements of livestock - such as sending animals to market - are still banned.

    He said farmers would be compensated for clean-up costs on top of normal compensation, and payments would start going out "in the next few days".

    "We have restricted the disease to a limited area of this country. The risk of it spreading out of these areas is low if not negligible," he said.

    Mike Giffin, chairman of the Surrey branch of the National Farmers' Union, said foot-and-mouth was "under control" at the moment.

    The first cases of foot-and-mouth were found in cattle at Woolford Farm, near Guildford, last Friday and a second outbreak was confirmed at a neighbouring farm on Monday. Cattle in both cases have been culled (BBC, 2007).

    Title: Foot-And-Mouth Tests At New Farm
    Date: August 10, 2007
    Source: Infowars

    Abstract:
    There is a "clinical suspicion" of a new foot-and-mouth outbreak in Surrey - outside the existing surveillance zone, it has been announced. Chief veterinary officer Debby Reynolds said a new 3km (1.8 mile) temporary control zone was in place at a farm. Laurence Matthews, who leases the farm, near Dorking, said he was sure his cattle did not have the disease. A confirmed outbreak would be the first outside the existing 10km (6.2 miles) surveillance zone. That is around two Guildford farms where the disease has been confirmed.

    'Developing Situation'

    Ms Reynolds said the new control zone - at Wotton, not far from the two confirmed cases of the disease near Guildford - had been set up after an "inconclusive assessment" of symptoms in cattle.

    She said the disease had not been confirmed and that laboratory results would follow.

    "This is a developing disease situation," she added.

    "The containment and eradication of foot-and-mouth disease remains our priority.

    "This is why we have moved swiftly to put in place a temporary control zone while we investigate this development."

    Mr Matthews said he called in a government vet when 10 of his 65 calves showed signs of a virus.

    He said the results of tests would be available later on Friday and he was "absolutely sure" they would be negative for foot-and-mouth.

    "I'm waiting for the results and really hoping they are going to be good," he said.

    "The vet is confident they don't have foot-and-mouth. This is really a belt and braces job."

    Suspicion

    Mr Matthews owns land used by farmer John Gunner in the initial exclusion zone, where the second outbreak of foot-and-mouth was found.

    He said none of his own cattle had been inside the zone.

    The first cases of foot-and-mouth were found in cattle at Woolford Farm, near Guildford, last Friday and a second outbreak was confirmed at a neighbouring farm on Monday. Cattle in both cases have been culled.

    A 3km (1.8 mile) protection zone was set up around the original affected farms as well as a wider 10km (6.2 miles) surveillance zone.

    Some 362 animals have been culled at a third farm within that surveillance zone, on suspicion that the disease could be developing there.

    Results of tests at that farm have yet to be announced.

    Vaccinations Call

    Farmers said they were relieved the disease had not spread too far, but expressed concern over the new control zone.

    Mike Giffin, chairman of the Surrey branch of the National Farmers' Union, said: "I think farmers are thinking this is not 2001.

    "We've got it - it's very, very localised. Defra has acted quickly, we've got it under control at the moment and most - nearly all - of the country is still foot-and-mouth free."

    But Bert Broom, also of the Surrey branch, said the latest development was "worrying".

    "It will be worrying for our members here and for farmers elsewhere in the country," he said.

    "But, thankfully at the moment, we're not talking about an outbreak outside Surrey."

    Lib Dem environment spokesman Chris Huhne urged the government to consider vaccinations to stop the disease spreading.

    Investigation

    Restrictions on taking animals to abattoirs have been lifted but many movements of livestock - such as sending animals to market - are still banned.

    Some restrictions had already been lifted in Scotland and Wales.

    Health inspectors are reportedly looking into the possibility that foot-and-mouth was originally transferred by employees at vaccine manufacturer Merial, based at the Pirbright lab site, near the original affected farms. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has said that either private company Merial, or the state-run Institute for Animal Health, both based at Pirbright, could be the source of the outbreak (Infowars, 2007)

    Title: Foot And Mouth Report Will Blame Government
    Date: October 7, 2007
    Source: Infowars

    Abstract: The Government will be blamed for failures at its research laboratories that caused this summer's foot and mouth outbreak.

    An inquiry is expected to criticise heavily the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for allowing the disease to escape from the laboratory at Pirbright, in Surrey.

    It will also single out the Government's agency for scientific research for the terrible state of disrepair at the laboratory linked to the outbreak, which led to the infection and slaughter of hundreds of cattle in the area.

    The inquiry, which will report in December, is headed by Dr Ian Anderson who investigated the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic.

    Dr Anderson has been asked to investigate whether the Government's response to this summer's crisis showed lessons had been learned from the last outbreak.

    His final report is likely to be positive about the measures taken to control the spread of the virus. But it is expected to be deeply critical of the Government for its failure to prevent the outbreak, which was linked to its laboratory in Pirbright which tests foot and mouth strains.

    Dr Anderson's report is expected to lay blame on the Government for failing to fund improvements to the site, which was described as "shabby" and "unsatisfactory" by parliamentary committees earlier this year.

    It is expected to accuse the bodies involved in its management and regulation — Defra, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) and the Institute of Animal Health (IAH) — of failing to agree clear responsibility for the running of the site.

    BBSRC, which funds and owns the site, is to come in for particular criticism.

    Last month, Hilary Benn, the Environment Secretary, admitted that a long-standing squabble over who should pay for the repairs to leaky drains at the IAH facility at Pirbright contributed to the release of the disease and its subsequent spread through local cattle herds. The IAH and Merial, a private vaccine company that leases a building on the site, have yet to agree who was responsible for maintaining the drains.

    Mr Benn made his comments after an instant review of biosafety at Pirbright expressed concern over the "old, poorly maintained and defective" drainage system.

    The state of the IAH lab indicated that not enough money was spent on securing the safety of the facility, which is more than 50 years old, the report by Prof Brian Spratt warned. A parallel report by the Health and Safety Executive found five breaches of its rules.

    The current inquiry by Dr Anderson will examine whether lessons were learned from the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak, and what lessons can be learned from the latest outbreak. A separate review is examining Defra's role as a regulator, inspector and customer of research into animal pathogens, while a third investigation is examining the way the IAH was run.

    The National Farmers Union said the crisis, combined with the latest outbreak of bluetongue disease, which has infected 25 cattle in East Anglia, had already cost the livestock industry at least £135million.

    A spokesman for Defra would not comment on speculation about the contents of the review, which only began last week. He said the review's remit was to look at the handling of the outbreak, not the cause of it, though the Government was always keen to learn lessons with regard to animal disease outbreaks.

    Last Wednesday, the European Union agreed to partially lift the export ban on meat from the UK as from Friday.

    The NFU said the decision was a relief for farmers in the West, North and Wales, but warned that the decision to proscribe the export of meat from an area which extends 120 miles beyond the foot and mouth surveillance zone in Surrey left "a large part of central and southern England out in the cold".

    Farmers in the Midlands, East Anglia and parts of the West Country remain covered by the ban, along with those across the South East (Infowars, 2007)

    Title: Farmers Sue Labs Over Foot-And-Mouth
    Date: October 17, 2008
    Source: Independent

    Abstract:
    A group of farmers have launched a legal claim against two laboratories blamed for last year's outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, it was announced today.

    The case has been formally launched in the High Court by 14 livestock farmers whose businesses were affected by the outbreak in Normandy, Surrey, in August last year.

    The claim has been brought against the Institute for Animal Health and Merial Animal Health Limited as operators of the Pirbright facility, and Defra Secretary Hilary Benn as licensor and regulator of the facility.

    The claim alleges that IAH and Merial were negligent in that they caused or permitted the foot and mouth disease virus to escape from the Pirbright facility. It also alleges that the Secretary of State was negligent in that he failed to properly licence or regulate the facility's operation.

    The losses claimed by the farmers include the slaughter of livestock and the disposal of livestock products, as well as losses incurred through being unable to move livestock on or off farms.

    Both labs have denied any failure in their duty of care while the Government has denied any negligence. The claim is supported by the National Farmers Union (NFU) who have instructed solicitors on behalf of the group.

    Those claiming include farmers close to the outbreak whose animals were slaughtered, as well as those further afield including sheep farmers from Cumbria and Powys and a pig breeding business from Yorkshire.

    NFU president Peter Kendall said: "Many farming businesses were devastated by the impacts of the outbreak and this claim is about getting redress for those farmers.

    "The effects of the outbreak were crippling for livestock farmers - milk had to be poured away, herds that had taken generations to breed had to be slaughtered, high quality livestock couldn't be exported or sold for breeding and instead had to go to slaughter, and animals couldn't be moved to fresh grazing and had to be left where they were.

    "For many farmers, the impacts of the outbreak are still being felt today.

    "This was not a case of foot and mouth disease coming in through our borders. The outbreak came from the Pirbright facility.

    "Had there been proper biosecurity and containment measures in place at Pirbright, this outbreak wouldn't have happened. This claim is about holding to account those who were responsible" (Independent, 2007).