Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

Search Results

Your search for 'biological warfare' returned 147 results.

FTR #1139 The Anthrax Attacks, the Invasion of Iraq and Expansion of Biological Warfare Capabilities

As the title indi­cates, this pro­gram presents polit­i­cal and his­tor­i­cal foun­da­tion for the expo­nen­tial expan­sion of Amer­i­can bio­log­i­cal war­fare infra­struc­ture fol­low­ing the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Impor­tant back­ground infor­ma­tion comes from the Whit­ney Webb arti­cle about DARPA spend­ing on bat-borne coro­n­avirus­es.

The Broad­cast­ing Board of Governors–a CIA “derivative”–and The Wash­ing­ton Times (owned by the Uni­fi­ca­tion Church) helped devel­op dis­in­for­ma­tion about SARS CoV‑2 com­ing from a Chi­nese Bio­log­i­cal War­fare lab. Both were instru­men­tal in hyp­ing the anthrax attacks as authored by Sad­dam Hus­sein, as well. The Wash­ing­ton Times also pre­sent­ed infor­ma­tion float­ed by Steven Hat­fill that fore­shad­owed sub­se­quent charges that Sad­dam Hus­sein was devel­op­ing bioweapons and was behind the 2001 anthrax attacks.

In addi­tion, the Project For a New Amer­i­can Cen­tu­ry was advanc­ing an agen­da in which genet­i­cal­ly-engi­neered bio­log­i­cal war­fare tech­nol­o­gy as essen­tial to con­tin­ued Amer­i­can glob­al dom­i­nance.

As will be seen below, a key func­tionary in the PNAC milieu was for­mer Sec­re­tary of Defense Don­ald Rums­feld, for­mer chair­man of the board of Gilead Sci­ences.

In FTR #‘s 1135, 1136 and 1137, we relied heav­i­ly on the Kris New­by’s Bit­ten: The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons. In that book, Ms. New­by net­worked with a group of expe­ri­enced, Cold War bio­log­i­cal war­fare pro­fes­sion­als whom she termed “the Brain Trust.” They were con­vinced that Fort Det­rick sci­en­tist Bruce Ivins–the “lone nut” who con­ve­nient­ly com­mit­ted sui­cide and was fin­gered as the sole per­pe­tra­tor of the 2001 anthrax attacks–was framed. ” . . . . Among oth­er sub­jects, they dis­cussed  . . . tech­ni­cal details on why they believed that their col­league Bruce Ivins had been framed as the anthrax mail­er . . . .”

Much of the pro­gram cen­ters on the 2001 attacks and the sus­pi­cion that focused on Steven Hat­fill as a pos­si­ble per­pe­tra­tor of them. Although exon­er­at­ed in the attacks, Hat­fill was the focal point of con­sid­er­able sus­pi­cion in con­nec­tion with the event. Our sus­pi­cion is that he is an oper­a­tive of one or anoth­er intel­li­gence agency, CIA being the most prob­a­ble.

We sus­pect that the anthrax attacks were a provo­ca­tion aimed at jus­ti­fy­ing the inva­sion of Iraq and spurring devel­op­ment of the U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare capa­bil­i­ty.

Of par­tic­u­lar note is the appar­ent “oper­a­tional Teflon” worn by Hat­fill. Although cir­cum­stan­tial evi­dence point­ed in his direc­tion, he appeared to be alto­geth­er “off lim­its” to inves­tiga­tive ele­ments of Alpha­bet Soup. Don Fos­ter not­ed the unusu­al treat­ment accord­ed to Hat­fill by the pow­ers that be.

Of sig­nif­i­cance, as well, are the numer­ous exam­ples of fore­shad­ow­ing of the foren­sic cir­cum­stances of the anthrax attacks, as well as oth­er “false alarm” inci­dents that occurred before and after the fatal attacks. It requires lit­tle to see state­ments and arti­cles by nota­bles such as Bill Patrick and the seem­ing­ly ubiq­ui­tous Steven Hat­fill as lay­ing a foun­da­tion of cred­i­bil­i­ty for sub­se­quent events.

Note that the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health have also part­nered with CIA and the Pen­ta­gon, as under­scored by an arti­cle about a BSL‑4 lab at Boston Uni­ver­si­ty.

1.–As the arti­cle notes, as of 2007, the U.S. had “more than a dozen” BSL4 labs–China com­mis­sioned its first as of 2017. a ten­fold increase in fund­ing for BSL4 labs occurred because of the anthrax attacks of 2001. Those attacks might be seen as some­thing of a provo­ca­tion, spurring a dra­mat­ic increase in “dual use” biowar­fare research, under the cov­er of “legit­i­mate” medical/scientific research. In FTR #1128, we hypoth­e­sized about the milieu of Steven Hat­fill and apartheid-linked inter­ests as pos­si­ble authors of a vec­tor­ing of New York City with Sars COV2: ” . . . . Before the anthrax mail­ings of 2001, the Unit­ed States had just two BSL4 labs—both with­in the razor-wire con­fines of gov­ern­ment-owned cam­pus­es. Now, thanks to a ten­fold increase in funding—from $200 mil­lion in 2001 to $2 bil­lion in 2006—more than a dozen such facil­i­ties can be found at uni­ver­si­ties and pri­vate com­pa­nies across the coun­try. . . .”
2.–The Boston Uni­ver­si­ty lab exem­pli­fies the Pen­ta­gon and CIA pres­ence in BSL‑4 facil­i­ty “dual use”: ” . . . . But some sci­en­tists say that argu­ment obscures the true pur­pose of the cur­rent biode­fense boom: to study poten­tial bio­log­i­cal weapons. ‘The uni­ver­si­ty por­trays it as an emerg­ing infec­tious dis­ease lab,’ says David Ozonoff, a Boston Uni­ver­si­ty epi­demi­ol­o­gist whose office is right across the street from the new BSL4 facil­i­ty. ‘But they are talk­ing about study­ing things like small pox and inhala­tion anthrax, which pose no pub­lic health threat oth­er than as bioweapons.’ . . . The orig­i­nal NIH man­date for the lab indi­cat­ed that many groups—including the CIA and Depart­ment of Defense—would be allowed to use the lab for their own research, the nature of which BU might have lit­tle con­trol over. . . .”

As not­ed in past pro­grams, Gilead Sci­ences is very well-con­nect­ed pro­fes­sion­al­ly, with for­mer Sec­re­tary of Defense Don­ald Rums­feld (among oth­er polit­i­cal lumi­nar­ies) serv­ing on its board of direc­tors. Rums­feld was chair­man of the board from 1997 until he left in 2001 to become George W. Bush’s Sec­re­tary of Defense.

Rums­feld was Sec­re­tary of Defense dur­ing the peri­od in which the 2001 anthrax attacks occurred.

Dur­ing the post‑9/11 peri­od of explod­ing gov­ern­ment invest­ments in biode­fense pro­grams, Sec­re­tary of Defense Don­ald Rums­feld was still hold­ing onto mas­sive amounts of Gilead stock, which was increas­ing in val­ue dra­mat­i­cal­ly. What kind of rela­tion­ship did Gilead devel­op with the US biode­fense nation­al secu­ri­ty state dur­ing this peri­od? That seems like a pret­ty impor­tant ques­tion at this point in time.

The U.S. gov­ern­ment was among the cus­tomers whose pur­chas­es drove up the Gilead earn­ings and stock price: ” . . . . What’s more, the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment is emerg­ing as one of the world’s biggest cus­tomers for Tam­i­flu. In July, the Pen­ta­gon ordered $58 mil­lion worth of the treat­ment for U.S. troops around the world, and Con­gress is con­sid­er­ing a mul­ti-bil­lion dol­lar pur­chase. . . .”

Sev­er­al years into his tenure at the Pen­ta­gon, Rums­feld made a killing on the sale of Gilead Sci­ences’ stock, which rose expo­nen­tial­ly in val­ue fol­low­ing its devel­op­ment of Tam­i­flu as a treat­ment for H5N1 avian flu.” . . . . The firm made a loss in 2003, the year before con­cern about bird flu start­ed. Then rev­enues from Tam­i­flu almost quadru­pled, to $44.6m, help­ing put the com­pa­ny well into the black. Sales almost quadru­pled again, to $161.6m last year. Dur­ing this time the share price tre­bled. Mr Rums­feld sold some of his Gilead shares in 2004 reap­ing – accord­ing to the finan­cial dis­clo­sure report he is required to make each year – cap­i­tal gains of more than $5m. The report showed that he still had up to $25m-worth of shares at the end of 2004, and at least one ana­lyst believes his stake has grown well beyond that fig­ure, as the share price has soared. . . .”

Don­ald Rums­feld was a sig­na­to­ry to the 1998 let­ter to Pres­i­dent Clin­ton by the Project for a New Amer­i­can Cen­tu­ry. That let­ter advo­cat­ed a hard­er line against Iraq. ” . . . . Rums­feld has strong ties to the Intel­li­gence Com­mu­ni­ty, as well as to the Atlantic Insti­tute, and is a mem­ber of the Bilder­berg group. He is a finan­cial sup­port­er for the Cen­ter for Secu­ri­ty Pol­i­cy. Rums­feld was one of the sign­ers of the Jan­u­ary 26, 1998, Project for the New Amer­i­can Cen­tu­ry (PNAC) let­ter sent to Pres­i­dent William Jef­fer­son Clin­ton. . . .”

DARPA and the Pen­ta­gon have into the appli­ca­tion of genet­ic engi­neer­ing in order to cre­ate eth­no-spe­cif­ic bio­log­i­cal war­fare weapons, as dis­cussed by the Project for a New Amer­i­can Cen­tu­ry.

In past pro­grams and posts, we have not­ed that DARPA was research­ing  bat-borne coro­n­avirus­es.  One can but won­der to what extent the PNAC doc­trine helped spawn the DARPA research into coro­n­avirus­es and, pos­si­bly, the Covid-19 pan­dem­ic.

FTR #1137 Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare, Part 3

Fur­ther devel­op­ing the links between bio­log­i­cal war­fare research and the Lyme Dis­ease estab­lish­ment, we review infor­ma­tion from FTR #585.

At every turn, Lyme dis­ease research is inex­tri­ca­bly linked with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research. Divid­ed into the “Steere” and “ILADS” camps, the Lyme dis­ease research com­mu­ni­ty is split between the view that the dis­ease is “hard-to-catch, easy-to-cure” and the dia­met­ri­cal­ly opposed view that the dis­ease is very seri­ous and pro­duces long-term neu­ro­log­i­cal dis­or­der. The Steere camp dimin­ish­es the sig­nif­i­cance of the dis­ease and is close­ly iden­ti­fied with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research. At the epi­cen­ter of Lyme dis­ease research (and the Steere camp) are mem­bers of the Epi­dem­ic Intel­li­gence Ser­vice, or EIS. EIS per­son­nel are to be found at every bend in the road of Lyme dis­ease research.

The Bor­re­lia genus has long been researched as a bio­log­i­cal war­fare vec­tor. Note that Unit 731 per­son­nel and their files were put to work for the Unit­ed States after World War II, much like the Project Paper­clip sci­en­tists from Ger­many. ” . . . bor­re­lia were known for their abil­i­ty to adopt dif­fer­ent forms under con­di­tions of stress (such as expo­sure to antibi­otics). Shed­ding their out­er wall, (which is the tar­get of peni­cillin and relat­ed drugs), they could ward off attack and con­tin­ue to exist in the body.  . .”

Much of the pro­gram is devot­ed to excerpt­ing and analy­sis of a 2013 post­ing by Ele­na Cook. This dis­cus­sion of “Spiro­chete War­fare,” in turn, makes lib­er­al use of mate­r­i­al from a 1944 text about Japan’s bio­log­i­cal war­fare pro­gram. This book “Japan’s Secret Weapon,” con­tains a great deal of infor­ma­tion about Japan­ese pio­neer­ing of the use of spiro­chetes as bio­log­i­cal war­fare organ­isms.

This mate­r­i­al is to be con­sid­ered in the his­tor­i­cal and polit­i­cal con­text of the incor­po­ra­tion of the key per­son­nel and files of the noto­ri­ous Japan­ese Unit 731 bio­log­i­cal war­fare divi­sion into the U.S. BW pro­gram after World War II.

Appar­ent­ly decades ahead of their Allied coun­ter­parts, Japan­ese use of spiro­chetes encom­passed a num­ber of impor­tant points to con­sid­er.

1.–The Japan­ese under­stood that “cell-wall defi­cient spiro­chetes, ” “gran­ule” and “L‑forms” had tremen­dous sig­nif­i­cance for bio­log­i­cal war­fare. ” . . . This WW2-era book helps to con­firm what some inves­ti­gat­ing the his­to­ry of Lyme dis­ease have long sus­pect­ed; that the offi­cial denial of the dev­as­tat­ing path­o­gen­ic nature of the gran­ule and oth­er ‘L‑forms’(1) of Lyme-caus­ing Bor­re­lia, is relat­ed to their bio­log­i­cal war­fare sig­nif­i­cance. . .”
2.–” . . . To put it blunt­ly, New­man’s book pro­vides cogent cir­cum­stan­tial evi­dence that many Cell-wall defi­cient forms of Bor­re­lia are in fact weaponized spiro­chetes, nur­tured, cul­tured and opti­mized for aerosol deliv­ery. . .” 
3.–According to author Bar­clay New­man, a com­bined Japan­ese and Nazi bio­log­i­cal war­fare offen­sive against Hawaii using the spiro­chetal dis­ease lep­tospiro­sis against Hawaii two or three years before the attack on Pearl Har­bor: ” . . . . ‘Nazi and Japan­ese sci­en­tists coop­er­at­ed in war­fare against or with spiro­chetes — in Hawaii.’ (orig­i­nal author’s ital­ics). What he is refer­ring to is an excep­tion­al­ly vir­u­lent out­break of the spiro­chetal dis­ease lep­tospiro­sis, also known as Weil’s dis­ease, and known at the time in Ger­many as ‘slime fever’. With offi­cial reports of 44% mor­tal­i­ty from the out­break, New­man states: Con­sult the author­i­ties, and you will find out that, very def­i­nite­ly, so high a mor­tal­i­ty is attained only by Japan­ese strains of spiro­chetes of slime fever. . . .”
4.–According to New­man, the Japan­ese had con­clud­ed that spiro­chetes, although very close to bac­te­ria in form, were not actu­al­ly bac­te­ria and there­fore: ” . . . . a spiro­chete can also break itself into many tiny gran­ules, each as small as the invis­i­ble mol­e­cule of a virus, and each capa­ble of recre­at­ing a new spiro­chete. . . .”
5.–Again, accord­ing to New­man: ” . . . The Japan­ese have report­ed that you can increase the vir­u­lence, or killing pow­er, of these spi­rals by grow­ing them in flesh and blood, of guinea pig or man. . .” This is inter­est­ing to con­sid­er in light of the evi­dence of Lyme Dis­ease as the prod­uct of bio­log­i­cal war­fare. Might some of the “tests” have had the goal of “grow­ing” such organ­isms in humans? ” . . . The resis­tance of many spiro­chetes, includ­ing bor­re­lia, to cul­ture in vit­ro remains a prob­lem for lab sci­en­tists even today. . .”
6.–The “gran­ule” spiro­chete form was found by the Japan­ese to have great val­ue for aerosolized BW appli­ca­tions: ” . . . Ina­da has report­ed that the Japan­ese know how to get virus-like, quite invis­i­ble par­ti­cles or spiro­chete-frag­ments from spe­cial cul­tures of spiro­chetes of infec­tious jaun­dice. The Japan­ese say that such infin­i­tes­i­mals can be used to infect ani­mals and men, by spray­ing droplets con­tain­ing these spiro­chete-cre­at­ing bits into the air, or spread­ing them through water, or scat­ter­ing them in mud or damp soil. . . .”
7.–The above-men­tioned lep­tospiro­sis or “slime fever” may have been used as a “soft­en­ing-up” agent pri­or to Japan­ese inva­sions in World War II” ” . . . ‘Imme­di­ate­ly before the Japan­ese inva­sions of Chi­na, Indo-Chi­na, the Dutch East Indies, and the Malay States, and short­ly before the Japan­ese inva­sion of India and the Japan­ese strokes at Aus­tralia, the very first out­breaks of slime fever were report­ed from every one of these areas’ . . .”
8.–The Japan­ese had dis­cov­ered the appli­ca­tion of infec­tion via mul­ti­ple pathogens. This may have fig­ured into the devel­op­ment of Lyme Dis­ease as well. ” . . . Fuji­mori (sic) was test­ing out the effects of spread­ing two dif­fer­ent par­a­sites into the same guinea pig at the same time. The Japan­ese dis­cov­ered that one par­a­site pro­motes the lethal action of the oth­er. . . .”
9.–The Japan­ese devel­oped with spread­ing spiro­chetal dis­ease via spray­ing droplets into the eyes of tar­gets. We won­der if Willy Burgdor­fer­’s pos­si­ble Lyme infec­tion from dis­eased Rab­bit-urine may have stemmed from this tech­nol­o­gy? This is dis­cussed below. ” . . . ‘Some­times the Japan­ese think up the damnedest exper­i­ments, such as the trans­mis­sion of syphilis by spray­ing the spiro­chetes into the air or into the eyes of ani­mals or vol­un­teers. Infec­tion is thus accom­plished. . . . if you want to spec­u­late fur­ther about the pos­si­bil­i­ties of spiro­chete war­fare, you can be sure that the Japan­ese know how to spread any spiro­chete dis­ease . . . by spray­ing droplets laden with spe­cial­ly cul­tured spiro­chetes. . . .”
10.-Among the dis­eases appar­ent­ly har­nessed for BW use by the Japan­ese was African relaps­ing fever. Willy Burgdor­fer did his grad­u­ate the­sis about this tick-borne spiro­chetal dis­ease and it was researched at length by his men­tor Rudolf Geigy. (Geigy’s pos­si­ble role as an I.G. Far­ben intel­li­gence agent and Paper­clip recruiter is dis­cussed in FTR #1135. Note that some forms of Bor­re­lia Burgdorferi–a pri­ma­ry causative agent of Lyme Disease–resemble the spiro­chete that caus­es relaps­ing fever. ” . . . Relaps­ing fever is caused by the Bor­re­lia genus of bac­te­ria, and is gen­er­al­ly trans­mit­ted to man either by lice, or by the bite of a tick. It is worth not­ing, too, that recent inves­ti­ga­tions into the genet­ic make-up of Lyme bor­re­lia have found some strains appar­ent­ly more close­ly relat­ed to relaps­ing fever Bor­re­lia than to Bor­re­lia burgdor­feri, long con­sid­ered the only bor­re­lia capa­ble of caus­ing Lyme dis­ease. . . .”

Next, the pro­gram details Rudolf Geigy’s work on relaps­ing fever. We sus­pect that his inter­est in such afflic­tions was not as benign and altru­is­tic as his defend­ers main­tain. As men­tioned above, Lyme Dis­ease “dis­cov­er­er” and bio­log­i­cal war­fare vet­er­an Willy Burgdor­fer did his grad­u­ate the­sis on relaps­ing fever.

Again, as men­tioned above, Willy Burgdor­fer con­tract­ed what he felt was Lyme Dis­ease after urine from an infect­ed rab­bit splashed into his eyes. We won­der if some of the tech­niques of using aerosolized spiro­chete gran­ules might have been involved in Willy’s acci­den­tal infec­tion? ” . . . .While he was rins­ing off one of the trays in the sink, Lyme-infect­ed rab­bit urine splashed into his eyes. A few weeks lat­er, on April 13, he noticed five Lyme bul­l’s-eye rash­es under his armpit and on his tor­so. . . .”

In an unpub­lished man­u­script, Willy Burgdor­fer not­ed not only the per­sis­tence of Lyme Dis­ease but its abil­i­ty to remain dor­mant in the ner­vous sys­tem: “. . . . It is now clear that Bor­re­lia burgdor­feri can per­sist with­in the ner­vous sys­tem for years, caus­ing pro­gres­sive ill­ness, and increas­ing evi­dence sug­gests also that the spiro­chete can remain latent there for years before pro­duc­ing clin­i­cal symp­toms. . . .”

Lyme dis­ease is dif­fi­cult to diag­nose, anoth­er fac­tor that makes it ide­al for BW use. Might the Japan­ese Unit 731 research into spiro­chetal war­fare described by Bar­clay New­man have fig­ured into some of the boil­er-plate research that went into the devel­op­ment of Lyme Dis­ease? ” . . . Lyme’s abil­i­ty to evade detec­tion on rou­tine med­ical tests, its myr­i­ad pre­sen­ta­tions which can baf­fle doc­tors by mim­ic­k­ing 100 dif­fer­ent dis­eases, its amaz­ing abil­i­ties to evade the immune sys­tem and antibi­ot­ic treat­ment, would make it an attrac­tive choice to bioweaponeers look­ing for an inca­pac­i­tat­ing agent. Lyme’s abil­i­ties as ‘the great imi­ta­tor’ might mean that an attack could be mis­in­ter­pret­ed as sim­ply a rise in the inci­dence of dif­fer­ent, nat­u­ral­ly-occur­ring dis­eases. . . .”

There is exper­i­men­tal evi­dence that infec­tion with Bor­re­lia burgdor­feri can pro­duce the amy­loid plaques symp­to­matic of Alzheimer’s Dis­ease. ” . . . Here is hypoth­e­sized a tru­ly rev­o­lu­tion­ary notion that round­ed cys­tic forms of Bor­re­lia burgdor­feri are the root cause of the round­ed struc­tures called plaques in the Alzheimer brain. Round­ed “plaques’ in high den­si­ty in brain tis­sue are emblem­at­ic of Alzheimer’s dis­ease (AD). . . .”

The pro­gram con­cludes with more exper­i­men­tal evi­dence of the pro­duc­tion of amy­loid deposits char­ac­ter­is­tic of Alzheimer’s Dis­ease: ” . . . To deter­mine whether an anal­o­gous host reac­tion to that occur­ring in AD could be induced by infec­tious agents, we exposed mam­malian glial and neu­ronal cells in vit­ro to Bor­re­lia burgdor­feri spiro­chetes . . . Mor­pho­log­i­cal changes anal­o­gous to the amy­loid deposits of AD brain were observed fol­low­ing 2–8 weeks of expo­sure to the spiro­chetes. . . These obser­va­tions indi­cate that, by expo­sure to bac­te­ria or to their tox­ic prod­ucts, host respons­es sim­i­lar in nature to those observed in AD may be induced. . . .”

FTR #1136 Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare, Part 2

A recent book about Lyme Dis­ease sets forth cred­i­ble infor­ma­tion that the dis­ease is an out­growth of U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare research.

Bit­ten, The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons chron­i­cles the career of Willy Burgdor­fer, a Swiss-born expert on tick and flea-borne dis­eases who spent most of his career research­ing those areas as a U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare sci­en­tist.
” . . . . if Willy’s claim was true, a crime against human­i­ty had been com­mit­ted by the U.S. gov­ern­ment, and then cov­ered up. . . ” “Bit­ten,” p. 103.

Lis­ten­ers are emphat­i­cal­ly encour­aged to pur­chase and read this book, as well as shar­ing it with oth­ers.

Author Kris New­by presents sub­stan­tive evi­dence that the dis­ease stems from BW research done by Burgdor­fer and asso­ciates. (Burgdor­fer was the sci­en­tist who “dis­cov­ered” the organ­ism that caus­es Lyme Dis­ease.)

 NB: The mate­r­i­al in this broad­cast is delib­er­ate­ly over­lapped with that in the last pro­gram.

In this post, we high­light infor­ma­tion about what Willy termed “the Swiss Agent”–a rick­ettsia that was present in the vast major­i­ty of Lyme suf­fer­ers test­ed ear­ly in research into the dis­ease.

Even­tu­al­ly, dis­cus­sion of the pos­si­ble role of Swiss Agent dropped out of dis­cus­sion. The dis­ap­pear­ance of the Swiss Agent from the sci­en­tif­ic ana­lyt­i­cal lit­er­a­ture coin­cid­ed with Willy’s tele­phone con­ver­sa­tions with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research vet­er­ans.

Key points of dis­cus­sion:

1.–” . . . . I would engage the sci­en­tif­ic part of his brain in answer­ing my two ques­tions: why the Lyme dis­cov­ery files were miss­ing from the Nation­al Archives, and why images of the organ­ism labeled ‘Swiss Agent’ were locat­ed in the archive fold­ers in the time-frame where one would expect the Lyme spiro­chete pic­tures to be. . . .”
2.–” . . . . He told me that in late 1979, he had test­ed ‘over one hun­dred ticks’ from Shel­ter Island, locat­ed about twen­ty miles from the Lyme out­break, and all but two had an uniden­ti­fied rick­ettsial species inside. It looked like Rick­ettsia mon­tana (now called Rick­ettsia mon­ta­nen­sis) under a micro­scope, a non-dis­ease-caus­ing cousin of the dead­ly Rick­ettsia rick­et­sii, but it was a dif­fer­ent species. . . .”
3.–” . . . .‘You say they’re not look­ing for it any­more?’ I asked. ‘They prob­a­bly paid peo­ple off,’ he said. ‘There are folks up there who have a way to enable that.’ . . .”
4.–” . . . . Next, I showed Willy an unla­beled image of a microbe and asked him what it was. ‘That is a Swiss Agent,’ said Willy. I asked him a series of ques­tions on this microbe and he recit­ed what seemed like well-rehearsed lines: the Swiss Agent is a Rick­ettsia mon­tana-like organ­ism found in the Euro­pean sheep tick, Ixodes Rici­nus, and it doesn’t cause dis­ease in humans. . . .”
5.–” . . . . Then I asked him why he brought sam­ples of it from Switzer­land back to his lab. He replied with the response that he often used when he seemed to know the answer but wasn’t going to divulge it: ‘Ques­tion mark.’. . .”
6.–” . . . . The real ‘smok­ing gun,’ though, was Willy’s hand­writ­ten lab notes on the patient blood tests from the dis­ease out­break in Con­necti­cut. These tests showed the proof-of-pres­ence of what I named ‘Swiss Agent USA,’ the mys­tery rick­ettsia present in most of the patients from the orig­i­nal Lyme out­break, a fact that was nev­er dis­closed in jour­nal arti­cles. It didn’t take a PhD in micro­bi­ol­o­gy to see that almost all the patient blood had react­ed strong­ly to an anti­gen test for a Euro­pean rick­ettsia that Willy had called the Swiss Agent. . . .”
7.–” . . . . In March, he wrote to Ander­son and Steere again: ‘Most spec­i­mens, with a few excep­tions, react­ed only against anti­gens pre­pared from the Swiss Agent.’ In short, the dis­ease clus­ters in Con­necti­cut and Long Island seemed to have been caused by Swiss Agent USA. Then, in April, the Swiss Agent USA rick­ettsia van­ished. It was nev­er again men­tioned in talks, let­ters, inter­views, or jour­nal arti­cles. . . .  There is, with­out a doubt, some­thing sus­pi­cious about the sud­den dis­ap­pear­ance of the Swiss Agent USA from all cor­re­spon­dence. . . .”
8.–The dis­ap­pear­ance of the Swiss Agent USA from the lit­er­a­ture on Lyme Dis­ease cor­re­spond­ed with an impor­tant con­ver­sa­tion that Willy had: ” . . . . It was in the begin­ning of 1980—two years before the first Lyme spiro­chetes were found—that the Swiss Agent USA dis­ap­peared. This about-face coin­cid­ed with a series of dis­cus­sions Willy had with old bioweapons devel­op­ers on the Rick­ettsial Com­mis­sion of the Armed Forces Epi­demi­o­log­i­cal Board, as record­ed in his per­son­al phone log. These sci­en­tists were most cer­tain­ly famil­iar with the secret his­to­ry of inca­pac­i­tat­ing rick­ettsial and viral agent test­ing, and they may have dis­cussed with Willy the pos­si­bil­i­ty of there hav­ing been an undis­closed field test in the Long Island region. . . .”
9.–Roundworms sim­i­lar to organ­isms stud­ied by Willy at the Naval Research Unit in Cairo turned up in some of the ticks: ” . . . . That’s when Willy found par­a­sitic round­worm lar­vae in the main body cav­i­ty of two of the ticks. They were sim­i­lar to the deer worms he’d found in ticks on his 1978 trip to Switzer­land, and sim­i­lar to the round­worms that he, Sonen­shine, and the Naval Research Unit in Cairo had worked with for a project explor­ing the ‘rel­a­tive­ly new field of endo-par­a­sitic trans­mis­sion of dis­ease agents.’ In these exper­i­ments, mul­ti­ple dis­ease agents were put inside mos­qui­to-borne round­worms, accord­ing to an NIH research report from 1961. . . .”
10.–Numerically, it appears that the Swiss Agent rick­ettsias out­num­bered the spiro­chetes that ulti­mate­ly were tabbed as the causative agent for Lyme Dis­ease: ” . . . . When Willy dis­sect­ed 124 more Shel­ter Island deer ticks, 98 per­cent had the new rick­ettsias in them and only 60 per­cent car­ried the new spiro­chetes. Willy thought that either microbe might be caus­ing Lyme dis­ease, but, for unknown rea­sons, this alter­na­tive the­o­ry fell into a black hole. . . .”

Piv­ot­ing to dis­cus­sion of the pol­i­tics of Lyme Dis­ease treat­ment, we note that legal and reg­u­la­to­ry rul­ings have enabled the patent­ing of liv­ing organ­isms and that has exac­er­bat­ed the mon­e­tiz­ing of Lyme Dis­ease treat­ment. That mon­e­ti­za­tion, in turn, has adverse­ly affect­ed the qual­i­ty of care for afflict­ed patients. As we will see lat­er, Willy Burgdor­fer was not the only Lyme Dis­ease researcher to become involved with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research. ” . . . . All of a sud­den, the insti­tu­tions that were sup­posed to be pro­tec­tors of pub­lic health became busi­ness part­ners with Big Phar­ma. The uni­ver­si­ty researchers who had pre­vi­ous­ly shared infor­ma­tion on dan­ger­ous emerg­ing dis­eases were now delay­ing pub­lish­ing their find­ings so they could become entre­pre­neurs and prof­it from patents through their uni­ver­si­ty tech­nol­o­gy trans­fer groups. We essen­tial­ly lost our sys­tem of sci­en­tif­ic checks and bal­ances. And this, in turn, has under­mined patient trust in the insti­tu­tions that are sup­posed to ‘do no harm.’ . . .”

Ms. New­by went up against the “Lyme Dis­ease estab­lish­ment” in an attempt to find out why the dis­ease was being mis-diag­nosed and inef­fec­tive­ly treat­ed. Strik­ing­ly, a FOIA suit she filed was stonewalled for five years, before final­ly yield­ing the doc­u­ments she had so long sought.

The “experts” and their agen­da was neat­ly, and alarm­ing­ly, summed up by Ms. New­by: ” . . . . The emails revealed a dis­turb­ing pic­ture of a nonof­fi­cial group of gov­ern­ment employ­ees and guide­lines authors that had been set­ting the nation­al Lyme dis­ease research agen­da with­out pub­lic over­sight or trans­paren­cy. . . . Bot­tom line, the guide­lines authors reg­u­lar­ly con­vened in gov­ern­ment-fund­ed, closed-door meet­ings with hid­den agen­das that lined the pock­ets of aca­d­e­m­ic researchers with sig­nif­i­cant com­mer­cial inter­ests in Lyme dis­ease tests and vac­cines. A large per­cent­age of gov­ern­ment grants were award­ed to the guide­line authors and/or researchers in their labs. Part of the group’s stat­ed mis­sion, culled from these FOIA emails, was to run a covert ‘dis­in­for­ma­tion war’ and a ‘sociopo­lit­i­cal offen­sive’ to dis­cred­it Lyme patients, physi­cians, and jour­nal­ists who ques­tioned the group’s research and motives. In the FOIA-obtained emails, Lyme patients and their treat­ing physi­cians were called ‘loonies’ and ‘quacks’ by Lyme guide­lines authors and NIH employ­ees. . . .”

Fur­ther devel­op­ing the links between bio­log­i­cal war­fare research and the Lyme Dis­ease estab­lish­ment, we review infor­ma­tion from FTR #585.

At every turn, Lyme dis­ease research is inex­tri­ca­bly linked with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research. Divid­ed into the “Steere” and “ILADS” camps, the Lyme dis­ease research com­mu­ni­ty is split between the view that the dis­ease is “hard-to-catch, easy-to-cure” and the dia­met­ri­cal­ly opposed view that the dis­ease is very seri­ous and pro­duces long-term neu­ro­log­i­cal dis­or­der. The Steere camp dimin­ish­es the sig­nif­i­cance of the dis­ease and is close­ly iden­ti­fied with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research. At the epi­cen­ter of Lyme dis­ease research (and the Steere camp) are mem­bers of the Epi­dem­ic Intel­li­gence Ser­vice, or EIS. EIS per­son­nel are to be found at every bend in the road of Lyme dis­ease research.

The Bor­re­lia genus has long been researched as a bio­log­i­cal war­fare vec­tor.

” . . . . The Bor­re­lia genus of bac­te­ria, which encom­pass­es the Bor­re­lia burgdor­feri species-group (to which Lyme dis­ease is attrib­uted), was stud­ied by the infa­mous WW2 Japan­ese biowar Unit 731, who car­ried out hor­rif­ic exper­i­ments on pris­on­ers in Manchuria, includ­ing dis­sec­tion of live human beings. [iii] Unit 731 also worked on a num­ber of oth­er tick-borne pathogens. . . . . bor­re­lia were known for their abil­i­ty to adopt dif­fer­ent forms under con­di­tions of stress (such as expo­sure to antibi­otics). Shed­ding their out­er wall, (which is the tar­get of peni­cillin and relat­ed drugs), they could ward off attack and con­tin­ue to exist in the body. . . .”

Note that Unit 731 per­son­nel and their files were put to work for the Unit­ed States after World War II, much like the Project Paper­clip sci­en­tists from Ger­many.

Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare, Part 4: Physicians [Financially] Healing Themselves

“Bit­ten, The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons” chron­i­cles the career of Willy Burgdor­fer, a Swiss-born expert on tick and flea-borne dis­eases who spent most of his career research­ing those areas as a U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare sci­en­tist. Author Kris
New­by presents sub­stan­tive evi­dence that the dis­ease stems from BW research done by Burgdor­fer and asso­ciates. Lis­ten­ers and read­ers are emphat­i­cal­ly encour­aged to pur­chase and read her book. In this post, we present dis­cus­sion of Ms. New­by’s expose of the insti­tu­tion­al­ly and finan­cial­ly inces­tu­ous rela­tion­ship between bureau­crat­ic and cor­po­rate enti­ties that both reg­u­late, and prof­it from, Lyme Dis­ease. Key “experts” involved with diag­nos­ing and treat­ing the afflic­tion run inter­fer­ence for the sta­tus quo. The “experts” and their agen­da were neat­ly, and alarm­ing­ly, summed up by Ms. New­by: ” . . . . The emails revealed a dis­turb­ing pic­ture of a nonof­fi­cial group of gov­ern­ment employ­ees and guide­lines authors that had been set­ting the nation­al Lyme dis­ease research agen­da with­out pub­lic over­sight or trans­paren­cy. . . . Part of the group’s stat­ed mis­sion, culled from these FOIA emails, was to run a covert ‘dis­in­for­ma­tion war’ and a ‘sociopo­lit­i­cal offen­sive’ to dis­cred­it Lyme patients, physi­cians, and jour­nal­ists who ques­tioned the group’s research and motives. In the FOIA-obtained emails, Lyme patients and their treat­ing physi­cians were called ‘loonies’ and ‘quacks’ by Lyme guide­lines authors and NIH employ­ees. . . .”

FTR #‘s 1135, Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare, Part 1

” . . . . if Willy’s claim was true, a crime against human­i­ty had been com­mit­ted by the U.S. gov­ern­ment, and then cov­ered up. . . ” Bit­ten, p. 103.

A recent book about Lyme Dis­ease sets forth cred­i­ble infor­ma­tion that the dis­ease is an out­growth of U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare research.

Bit­ten, The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons chron­i­cles the career of Willy Burgdor­fer, a Swiss-born expert on tick and flea-borne dis­eases who spent most of his career research­ing those areas as a U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare sci­en­tist.

Author Kris New­by presents sub­stan­tive evi­dence that the dis­ease stems from BW research done by Burgdor­fer and asso­ciates. (Burgdor­fer was the sci­en­tist who “dis­cov­ered” the organ­ism that caus­es Lyme Dis­ease.)

In past dis­cus­sion of Lyme Dis­ease, we have explored the incor­po­ra­tion of Nazi sci­en­tists via Oper­a­tion Paper­clip into the Amer­i­can bio­log­i­cal war­fare pro­gram and pos­si­ble links between their work and the spread of the dis­ease in Con­necti­cut, across Long Island Sound from Plum Island.

(FTR #‘s 480 and 585 high­light dis­cus­sion about Lyme Dis­ease and bio­log­i­cal war­fare.)

Burgdor­fer­’s entree into the Amer­i­can bio­log­i­cal war­fare pro­gram result­ed from his pro­fes­sion­al rela­tion­ship with long time men­tor and patron Rudolf Geigy. Geigy belonged to a fam­i­ly whose busi­ness, J.R. Geigy AG, was a Swiss chem­i­cal firm mar­ket­ing dyes and insec­ti­cides.

Sig­nif­i­cant­ly, J.R. Geigy, Ciba and San­doz com­prised a Swiss chem­i­cal car­tel formed in the after­math of World War I to com­pete with the I.G. Far­ben car­tel.

(Today, the three com­pa­nies have coa­lesced as the Swiss phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal giant Novar­tis.)

Even­tu­al­ly, the Swiss con­sor­tium was absorbed into, and became a key com­po­nent of, the I.G. Far­ben car­tel. They read­i­ly col­lab­o­rat­ed with the Third Reich:

1.–” . . . . The chap­ters on Switzer­land’s chem­i­cal indus­try are the most embar­rass­ing sec­tion of the com­mis­sion’s report. It is now clear that the direc­tors of Swiss com­pa­nies in Basel were very well aware what was going on at the time in Ger­many and had knowl­edge of the coerced employ­ment of forced labor­ers in their branch plants in Ger­many as well as of the fact that forced labor­ers died as a result of the con­di­tions in which they were held. . . .”
2.–” . . . . sev­er­al lead­ing Swiss chem­i­cal firms — includ­ing JR Geigy, Ciba, San­doz and Hoff­mann-La Roche — put their own inter­ests ahead of human­i­tar­i­an con­cerns in their deal­ing with the Nazis. . . .”
3.–” . . . .The ICE [Inde­pen­dent Com­mis­sion of Experts] con­clud­ed that the chem­i­cal firms’ boss­es in Switzer­land ‘pos­sessed a high lev­el of detailed knowl­edge about the polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic sit­u­a­tion in Nazi Ger­many... [and] incor­po­rat­ed their knowl­edge... into their eco­nom­ic plan­ning and used it as a basis for deci­sion-mak­ing’ . . . .”
4.–” . . . . ‘Geigy main­tained par­tic­u­lar­ly good rela­tions with Claus Unge­wit­ter, the Reich com­mis­sion­er for chem­i­cals.’ . . .”
5.–” . . . . Dur­ing the war, it [Geigy] pro­duced insec­ti­cides and, most notably, the icon­ic ‘polar red’ dye that col­ored the back­ground of Nazi swasti­ka flags. . . .”

All three Swiss firms [Geigy, San­doz and Ciba] were indict­ed in the Unit­ed States in 1942 because of their col­lab­o­ra­tion with I.G. Far­ben and the Third Reich.

1.–” . . . . Those indict­ed includ­ed duPont; Allied Chem­i­cal and Dye; and Amer­i­can Cyanamid; also Far­ben affil­i­ates the Amer­i­can Ciba, San­doz and Geigy. . . .”
2.–” . . . . A long list of oth­er co-con­spir­a­tors includ­ed the Swiss Ciba, San­doz and Geigy com­pa­nies with Cincin­nati Chem­i­cal works, their joint­ly owned Amer­i­can con­cern . . . .”
3.–” . . . . When Sec­re­tary of War Stim­son and Attor­ney Gen­er­al Bid­dle agreed to post­pone the tri­al until it would not inter­fere with war pro­duc­tion, one Jus­tice Depart­ment offi­cial was quot­ed as say­ing sourly, ‘First they hurt the war effort by their restric­tive prac­tices, and then if caught they use the war effort as an excuse to avoid pros­e­cu­tion.’ . . .”

Use­ful back­ground research with which to flesh out under­stand­ing of the tit­il­lat­ing infor­ma­tion pre­sent­ed by Ms. New­by con­cern­ing Geigy and his activ­i­ties can be obtained by read­ing some of the many books avail­able for down­load on this web­site.

Numer­ous pro­grams present research on the top­ic, includ­ing FTR #511.

A key foun­da­tion­al ele­ment for the dis­cus­sion of Bit­ten is the Pen­tagon’s decades-long research into the genet­ic manip­u­la­tion of micro­bial pathogens.

1.–Nobel Prize win­ner Joshua Leder­berg warned of the con­se­quences for human­i­ty of this work: ” . . . .‘The large-scale deploy­ment of infec­tious agents is a poten­tial threat against the whole species: mutant forms of virus­es could well devel­op that would spread over the earth’s pop­u­la­tion for a new Black Death,’ said Leder­berg in a Wash­ing­ton Post edi­to­r­i­al on Sep­tem­ber 24, 1966. He added, ‘The future of the species is very much bound up with the con­trol of these weapons. Their use must be reg­u­lat­ed by the most thought­ful recon­sid­er­a­tion of U.S. and world pol­i­cy.’ . . .”
2.–The Pen­ta­gon was dis­mis­sive of the warn­ing: ” . . . . A month lat­er, the army’s Bio­log­i­cal Sub­com­mit­tee Muni­tions Advi­so­ry Group thumbed its nose at this ‘nation­al pro­nounce­ment made by promi­nent sci­en­tists.’ . . . The advi­so­ry group then con­tin­ued dis­cussing its plans for genet­ic manip­u­la­tion of microbes, new rick­ettsial and viral agents, and the devel­op­ment of a bal­anced pro­gram for both inca­pac­i­tat­ing and lethal agents. . . .”
3.–By 1962, the mil­i­tary’s plans for devel­op­ment of genet­i­cal­ly mod­i­fied microbes were devel­op­ing in earnest. ” . . . . Fort Detrick’s direc­tor of bio­log­i­cal research, Dr. J.R. Good­low, on Feb­ru­ary 16, 1962 . . . added, ‘Stud­ies of bac­te­r­i­al genet­ics are also in progress with the aim of trans­fer­ring genet­ic deter­mi­nants from one type of organ­ism to another.‘The goal of these exper­i­ments was to make bio­log­i­cal agents more vir­u­lent and resis­tant to antibi­otics. . . .”

The Pen­tagon’s genet­ic manip­u­la­tion of microor­gan­isms for bio­log­i­cal war­fare pur­pos­es involved the Rocky Moun­tain Lab and Willy Burgdor­fer.

1.–” . . . . Bioweapons researchers such as Willy knew that infect­ing large pop­u­la­tions would require expos­ing peo­ple to agents for which they had no nat­ur­al immu­ni­ty. And to do this, researchers would have to import and/or invent new microbes. They were, in essence, play­ing God, cre­at­ing ‘bac­te­ri­o­log­i­cal freaks or mutants,’ by using chem­i­cals, radi­a­tion, ultra­vi­o­let light, and oth­er agents, wrote mod­ern inves­tiga­tive jour­nal­ism pio­neer Jack Ander­son in a Wash­ing­ton Post col­umn on August 27, 1965. . . .”
2.–” . . . . Willy had already been con­duct­ing a tri­al-and-error style of genet­ic manip­u­la­tion in the same way that a corn farmer or a hog grow­er selec­tive­ly breeds strains that result in desired out­comes. He was grow­ing microbes inside ticks, hav­ing the ticks feed on ani­mals, and then har­vest­ing the microbes from the ani­mals that exhib­it­ed the lev­el of ill­ness the mil­i­tary had request­ed. . . .”
3.–” . . . . He was also simul­ta­ne­ous­ly mix­ing bac­te­ria and virus­es inside ticks, lever­ag­ing the virus’s innate abil­i­ty to manip­u­late bac­te­r­i­al genes in order to repro­duce, and thus accel­er­at­ing the rate of muta­tions and desir­able new bac­te­r­i­al traits. In 1966, Fort Detrick’s Bio­log­i­cal Sub­com­mit­tee Muni­tions Advi­so­ry Group put this emerg­ing research area at the top of its pri­or­i­ties, describ­ing it as ‘Research in micro­bial genet­ics con­cerned with aspects of trans­for­ma­tion, trans­duc­tion, and recom­bi­na­tion.’ . .”

 Inter­viewed by an indie film­mak­er named Tim Grey, Willy Burgdor­fer dis­cussed the devel­op­ment of Lyme Dis­ease as a bio­log­i­cal war­fare weapon. It was Burgdor­fer who “dis­cov­ered” the spiro­chete that caused Lyme Dis­ease in 1982. As we will see lat­er, it appears that more than one organ­ism is involved with Lyme Dis­ease.

1.–” . . . . Willy paused, then replied, ‘Ques­tion: Has [sic] Bor­re­lia Burgdor­feri have the poten­tial for bio­log­i­cal war­fare?’ As tears welled up in Willy’s eyes, he con­tin­ued, ‘Look­ing at the data, it already has. If the organ­ism stays with­in the sys­tem, you won’t even rec­og­nize what it is. In your lifes­pan, it can explode . . . We eval­u­at­ed. You nev­er deal with that [as a sci­en­tist]. You can sleep bet­ter.’ . . .”
2.–” . . . . Lat­er in the video, Grey cir­cled back to this top­ic and asked, ‘If there’s an emer­gence of a brand-new epi­dem­ic that has the tenets of all of those things that you put togeth­er, do you feel respon­si­ble for that?’ ‘Yeah. . . .’ ”
3.–” . . . . Grey asked him the one ques­tion, the only ques­tion, he real­ly cared about: ‘Was the pathogen that you found in the tick that Allen Steere [the Lyme out­break inves­ti­ga­tor] gave you the same pathogen or sim­i­lar, or a gen­er­a­tional muta­tion, of the one you pub­lished in the paper . . . the paper from 1952?’ ”
4.–” . . . . The left side of his mouth briefly curled up, as if he is think­ing, ‘Oh, well.’ Then anger flash­es across his face. ‘Yah,’ he said, more in Ger­man than Eng­lish. . . .”
5.–” . . . . It was a stun­ning admis­sion from one of the world’s fore­most author­i­ties on Lyme dis­ease. If it was true, it meant that Willy had left out essen­tial data from his sci­en­tif­ic arti­cles on the Lyme dis­ease out­break, and that as the dis­ease spread like a wild­fire in the North­east and Great Lakes regions of the Unit­ed States, he was part of the cov­er-up of the truth. . . It had been cre­at­ed in a mil­i­tary bioweapons lab for the spe­cif­ic pur­pose of harm­ing human beings. . . . ”

To con­clude the pro­gram, we high­light infor­ma­tion about what Willy termed “the Swiss Agent”–a rick­ettsia that was present in the vast major­i­ty of Lyme suf­fer­ers test­ed ear­ly in research into the dis­ease. Note that this ele­ment of analy­sis will be con­tin­ued in our next pro­gram.

Even­tu­al­ly, dis­cus­sion of the pos­si­ble role of Swiss Agent dropped out of dis­cus­sion. The dis­ap­pear­ance of the Swiss Agent from the sci­en­tif­ic ana­lyt­i­cal lit­er­a­ture coin­cid­ed with Willy’s tele­phone con­ver­sa­tions with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research vet­er­ans.

Key points of dis­cus­sion:

1.–” . . . . I would engage the sci­en­tif­ic part of his brain in answer­ing my two ques­tions: why the Lyme dis­cov­ery files were miss­ing from the Nation­al Archives, and why images of the organ­ism labeled ‘Swiss Agent’ were locat­ed in the archive fold­ers in the time-frame where one would expect the Lyme spiro­chete pic­tures to be. . . .”
2.–” . . . . He told me that in late 1979, he had test­ed ‘over one hun­dred ticks’ from Shel­ter Island, locat­ed about twen­ty miles from the Lyme out­break, and all but two had an uniden­ti­fied rick­ettsial species inside. It looked like Rick­ettsia mon­tana (now called Rick­ettsia mon­ta­nen­sis) under a micro­scope, a non-dis­ease-caus­ing cousin of the dead­ly Rick­ettsia rick­et­sii, but it was a dif­fer­ent species. . . .”
3.–” . . . .‘You say they’re not look­ing for it any­more?’ I asked. ‘They prob­a­bly paid peo­ple off,’ he said. ‘There are folks up there who have a way to enable that.’ . . .”
4.–” . . . . Next, I showed Willy an unla­beled image of a microbe and asked him what it was. ‘That is a Swiss Agent,’ said Willy. I asked him a series of ques­tions on this microbe and he recit­ed what seemed like well-rehearsed lines: the Swiss Agent is a Rick­ettsia mon­tana-like organ­ism found in the Euro­pean sheep tick, Ixodes Rici­nus, and it doesn’t cause dis­ease in humans. . . .”
5.–” . . . . Then I asked him why he brought sam­ples of it from Switzer­land back to his lab. He replied with the response that he often used when he seemed to know the answer but wasn’t going to divulge it: ‘Ques­tion mark.’. . .”
6.–” . . . . The real ‘smok­ing gun,’ though, was Willy’s hand­writ­ten lab notes on the patient blood tests from the dis­ease out­break in Con­necti­cut. These tests showed the proof-of-pres­ence of what I named ‘Swiss Agent USA,’ the mys­tery rick­ettsia present in most of the patients from the orig­i­nal Lyme out­break, a fact that was nev­er dis­closed in jour­nal arti­cles. It didn’t take a PhD in micro­bi­ol­o­gy to see that almost all the patient blood had react­ed strong­ly to an anti­gen test for a Euro­pean rick­ettsia that Willy had called the Swiss Agent. . . .”

Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare, Part 3: The “Swiss Agent”

“Bit­ten, The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons” chron­i­cles the career of Willy Burgdor­fer, a Swiss-born expert on tick and flea-borne dis­eases who spent most of his career research­ing those areas as a U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare sci­en­tist. Author Kris
New­by presents sub­stan­tive evi­dence that the dis­ease stems from BW research done by Burgdor­fer and asso­ciates. Lis­ten­ers and read­ers are emphat­i­cal­ly encour­aged to pur­chase and read her book. In this post, we high­light infor­ma­tion about what Willy termed “the Swiss Agent”–a rick­ettsia that was present in the vast major­i­ty of Lyme suf­fer­ers test­ed ear­ly in research into the dis­ease. The dis­ap­pear­ance of the Swiss Agent USA from the lit­er­a­ture on Lyme Dis­ease cor­re­spond­ed with an impor­tant con­ver­sa­tion that Willy had: ” . . . . It was in the begin­ning of 1980—two years before the first Lyme spiro­chetes were found—that the Swiss Agent USA dis­ap­peared. This about-face coin­cid­ed with a series of dis­cus­sions Willy had with old bioweapons devel­op­ers on the Rick­ettsial Com­mis­sion of the Armed Forces Epi­demi­o­log­i­cal Board, as record­ed in his per­son­al phone log. These sci­en­tists were most cer­tain­ly famil­iar with the secret his­to­ry of inca­pac­i­tat­ing rick­ettsial and viral agent test­ing, and they may have dis­cussed with Willy the pos­si­bil­i­ty of there hav­ing been an undis­closed field test in the Long Island region. . . .”

Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare, Part 2

“Bit­ten, The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons” chron­i­cles the career of Willy Burgdor­fer, a Swiss-born expert on tick and flea-borne dis­eases who spent most of his career research­ing those areas as a U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare sci­en­tist. Author Kris
New­by presents sub­stan­tive evi­dence that the dis­ease stems from BW research done by Burgdor­fer and asso­ciates. Lis­ten­ers and read­ers are emphat­i­cal­ly encour­aged to pur­chase and read her book. A key foun­da­tion­al ele­ment for the dis­cus­sion of “Bit­ten” is the Pen­tagon’s decades-long research into the genet­ic manip­u­la­tion of micro­bial pathogens. Nobel Prize win­ner Joshua Leder­berg warned of the con­se­quences for human­i­ty of this work: ” . . . .‘The large-scale deploy­ment of infec­tious agents is a poten­tial threat against the whole species: mutant forms of virus­es could well devel­op that would spread over the earth’s pop­u­la­tion for a new Black Death,’ said Leder­berg in a Wash­ing­ton Post edi­to­r­i­al on Sep­tem­ber 24, 1966. . . .” Dr. Leder­berg’s warn­ing went unheed­ed: ” . . . . Fort Detrick’s direc­tor of bio­log­i­cal research, Dr. J.R. Good­low, on Feb­ru­ary 16, 1962 . . . added, ‘Stud­ies of bac­te­r­i­al genet­ics are also in progress with the aim of trans­fer­ring genet­ic deter­mi­nants from one type of organ­ism to another.‘The goal of these exper­i­ments was to make bio­log­i­cal agents more vir­u­lent and resis­tant to antibi­otics. . . .” Lyme Dis­ease “dis­cov­er­er” Willy Burgdor­fer focused on genet­ic manip­u­la­tion: ” . . . . He was also simul­ta­ne­ous­ly mix­ing bac­te­ria and virus­es inside ticks, lever­ag­ing the virus’s innate abil­i­ty to manip­u­late bac­te­r­i­al genes in order to repro­duce, and thus accel­er­at­ing the rate of muta­tions and desir­able new bac­te­r­i­al traits. In 1966, Fort Detrick’s Bio­log­i­cal Sub­com­mit­tee Muni­tions Advi­so­ry Group put this emerg­ing research area at the top of its pri­or­i­ties, describ­ing it as ‘Research in micro­bial genet­ics con­cerned with aspects of trans­for­ma­tion, trans­duc­tion, and recom­bi­na­tion.’ . .”

Lyme Disease and Biological Warfare

“Bit­ten, The Secret His­to­ry of Lyme Dis­ease and Bio­log­i­cal Weapons” chron­i­cles the career of Willy Burgdor­fer, a Swiss-born expert on tick and flea-borne dis­eases who spent most of his career research­ing those areas as a U.S. bio­log­i­cal war­fare sci­en­tist. Author Kris
New­by presents sub­stan­tive evi­dence that the dis­ease stems from BW research done by Burgdor­fer and asso­ciates. Lis­ten­ers and read­ers are emphat­i­cal­ly encour­aged to pur­chase and read her book. Inter­viewed by an indie film­mak­er named Tim Grey, Willy Burgdor­fer dis­cussed the devel­op­ment of Lyme Dis­ease as a bio­log­i­cal war­fare weapon. It was Burgdor­fer who “dis­cov­ered” the spiro­chete that caused Lyme Dis­ease in 1982. As we will see lat­er, it appears that more than one organ­ism is involved with Lyme Dis­ease. ” . . . . Final­ly, after three hours and four­teen min­utes, Grey asked him the one ques­tion, the only ques­tion, he real­ly cared about: ‘was the pathogen that you found in the tick that Allen Steere [the Lyme out­break inves­ti­ga­tor] gave you the same pathogen or sim­i­lar, or a gen­er­a­tional muta­tion, of the one you pub­lished in the paper . . . the paper from 1952?’ In response, Willy crossed his arms defen­sive­ly, took a deep breath, and stared into the cam­era for forty-three seconds—an eter­ni­ty. Then he looked away, down and to the right; he appeared to be work­ing through an inter­nal debate. The left side of his mouth briefly curled up, as if he is think­ing, ‘Oh, well.’ Then anger flash­es across his face. ‘Yah,’ he said, more in Ger­man than Eng­lish. . . . It was a stun­ning admis­sion from one of the world’s fore­most author­i­ties on Lyme dis­ease. . . . He seemed to be say­ing that Lyme wasn’t a nat­u­ral­ly occur­ring germ. . . .”

White Supremacists, Nazis and Biological Warfare

In FTR #1127, we not­ed that a ran­dom test­ing of New York City res­i­dents indi­cat­ed that up to a fifth of the city’s res­i­dents may have been infect­ed with one of the milder strains of Covid019. That sug­gests very strong­ly that the city was vectored–it is epi­demi­o­log­i­cal­ly absurd to assume that the virus came from Chi­na. In that same pro­gram, we not­ed that New York had been the site of a bio­log­i­cal war­fare test in 1965: ” . . . . In the sum­mer of 1965, Spe­cial Oper­a­tions men walked into three New York City sub­way sta­tions and tossed light­bulbs filled with Bacil­lus sub­tilis, a benign bac­te­ria, onto the tracks. The sub­way trains pushed the germs through the entire sys­tem and the­o­ret­i­cal­ly killed over a mil­lion pas­sen­gers. . . .” In FTR #317, we set forth the late Dr. Lar­ry Ford’s work for the CIA assist­ing the South African apartheid regime’s Project Coast bio­log­i­cal war­fare pro­gram. Ford: was a devo­tee of “The Turn­er Diaries; secured Ebo­la and Mar­burg virus­es for Project Coast; may have been linked to a glob­al net­work of white suprema­cists that grew out of Project Coast; was posthu­mous­ly inves­ti­gat­ed in con­nec­tion with the anthrax attacks of 2001. In FTR #642, we high­light­ed bio­log­i­cal war­fare expert Steven Hat­fil­l’s asso­ci­a­tion with the white nation­al­ist regimes of Rhode­sia (now Zim­bab­we) and apartheid South Africa, includ­ing White Afrikan­er Resis­tance (AWB). Hat­fill was inves­ti­gat­ed in con­nec­tion with the 2001 anthrax attacks as well, and sub­se­quent­ly exhon­er­at­ed. Hat­fill was very close to Bill Patrick, who over­saw the 1965 bio­log­i­cal war­fare exper­i­ment which infect­ed the New York City Sub­way sys­tem with mil­lions of sim­u­lat­ed path­o­gen­ic bac­te­ria. We won­der if Hat­fill may have (per­haps indi­rect­ly) pro­vid­ed impe­tus to a vec­tor­ing of New York City with a mild strain of Covid-19? We also note that Hat­fill has net­worked with Steve Ban­non, who is at the epi­cen­ter of the anti-Chi­na effort. In FTR #324, we exam­ined Project Coast in detail. That exam­i­na­tion includ­ed the oper­a­tion’s use of Ebo­la (alleged­ly in tan­dem with per­son­nel from Ft. Det­rick) and very cred­i­ble accounts of a pow­er­ful, alto­geth­er dead­ly net­work of post-apartheid operatives–“Die Organ­isas­ie”– linked to Project Coast and aspir­ing to a return to white dom­i­na­tion of South­ern Africa. With Chi­na mak­ing inroads into Africa, we won­der if that alto­geth­er lethal net­work MAY have been enlist­ed in the anti-Chi­na effort? We also won­der if some of the Project Coast research MAY have had bear­ing on the selction of remde­sivir (developed–unsuccessfully–to fight Ebo­la), pro­duced by Gilead Sciences,a major invest­ment of Robert Mer­cer’s Renais­sance Tech­nolo­gies?

FTR #1115 Review of Some Information about AIDS as a Biological Warfare Agent

Against the back­ground of our dis­cus­sion of the Covid-19 out­break as what Mr. Emory has termed a “Bio-Psy-Op,” we present archival mate­r­i­al about the devel­op­ment of AIDS as a bio­log­i­cal war­fare agent.

(Pro­grams con­tain­ing infor­ma­tion on AIDS as a BW weapon include: AFA #s 16 and 39, as well as FTR #‘s 16, 19, 63, 317, 324, 557, 597, 606, 642, 644, 682, 820, 912, 1012.)

The pro­gram begins with review of an inter­view with Dr. Wilbert Jor­dan of Mar­tin Luther King Hos­pi­tal in Los Ange­les (from AFA 16.) Done in Decem­ber of 1984, it gives per­spec­tive on the epi­demi­o­log­i­cal aspects of AIDS–information that under­mines the pre­vail­ing the­o­ries at the time con­cern­ing the ori­gins of the dis­ease.

Not­ing that a dis­ease as lethal as AIDS was at the time (before anti-virals devel­oped to treat HIV infec­tion), Dr. Jor­dan is dis­mis­sive of the notion that such a lethal ail­ment could have been present in either Zaire or Haiti and then ret­ro­spec­tive­ly traced there after being dis­cov­ered in the U.S.

The notions of Haiti and/or Zaire being the point of ori­gin of the dis­ease played into the anti-immi­grant/xeno­pho­bic dynam­ic that has become preva­lent in the era of Don­ald Trump.

Dr. Jor­dan con­cludes by hypoth­e­siz­ing that the dis­ease was cre­at­ed in a lab­o­ra­to­ry, in all prob­a­bil­i­ty in the Unit­ed States.

Next, the pro­gram high­lights infor­ma­tion from FTR #686, set­ting forth infor­ma­tion about the Nation­al Can­cer Insti­tute’s Spe­cial Viral Can­cer Research Project.

After the [offi­cial] aban­don­ment by the U.S. of offen­sive bio­log­i­cal war­fare research, the Nixon admin­is­tra­tion declared a “war on can­cer” in 1971. As part of the War on Can­cer Nixon turned Fort Det­rick (the Army’s top BW research cen­ter) over to the Nation­al Can­cer Insti­tute for its Viral Can­cer Project. The Viral Can­cer Project was inex­tri­ca­bly linked with bio­log­i­cal war­fare research and may well have served as a cov­er for ongo­ing BW work. (Lis­ten­ers inter­est­ed in this mate­r­i­al are encour­aged to check out, among oth­er pro­grams, FTR #‘s 606, 682.)

For the pur­pos­es of the present dis­cus­sion, it is worth not­ing that it was the Nation­al Can­cer Insti­tute’s VCP that was at the epi­cen­ter of AIDS research in the Unit­ed States.

The VCP/NCI bio­log­i­cal war­fare con­nec­tion uti­lized strong con­nec­tions to uni­ver­si­ty research facil­i­ties. The Naval Bio­sciences Lab­o­ra­to­ry (man­aged by the Uni­ver­si­ty of Cal­i­for­nia), as well as Fort Det­rick were pro­found­ly involved with the NCI’s VCP. The Cell Cul­ture Lab­o­ra­to­ry at the Naval Bio­sciences Facil­i­ty pro­vid­ed the seed stock for the pro­duc­tion of vast quan­ti­ties of car­cino­genic and immuno­sup­pres­sive virus­es that were gen­er­at­ed by the Nation­al Can­cer Insti­tute.

The pro­duc­tion of those virus­es for the NCI was over­seen by Drs. James Duff and Jack Gru­ber, both long­time vet­er­ans of Fort Det­rick and its bio­log­i­cal war­fare research.

The aer­i­al trans­mis­sion of dead­ly path­o­gen­ic agents was a major focal point of the NCI’s VCP, appar­ent­ly over­lap­ping BW research projects. Two oth­er key researchers for the NCI, Drs. Alfred Hell­man and Mark Chatigny also had bio­log­i­cal war­fare research back­grounds, includ­ing work with aer­i­al trans­mis­sion of path­o­gen­ic agents.

Yet anoth­er com­po­nent of the NCI/VCP/BW con­nec­tion was the incor­po­ra­tion of phar­ma­ceu­ti­cal com­pa­nies in the research pro­grams. The Pfiz­er com­pa­ny pro­duced virus­es for the NCI’s VCP, includ­ing the immuno­sup­pres­sive Mason-Pfiz­er mon­key virus, like HIV, a retro­virus.

Among the most sig­nif­i­cant and alarm­ing aspects of the NCI’s VCP pro­gram is the fact that, when Fort Det­rick was con­vert­ed to the Fred­er­ick Can­cer Research Cen­ter, it was admin­is­tered by Lit­ton Bio­net­ics, a biotech­nol­o­gy subi­sidiary of Lit­ton Indus­tries. Lit­ton was a major defense con­trac­tor and a fre­quent vehi­cle for covert oper­a­tions.

Pri­or to assum­ing stew­ard­ship of Fort Det­rick for the NCI, Lit­ton Bio­net­ics had employed Dr. Robert Gal­lo (the “dis­cov­er­er” of HIV).

Of para­mount impor­tance in this inves­ti­ga­tion is the fact that the NCI’s VCP pro­gram involved numer­ous exper­i­ments and oper­a­tions designed at get­ting organ­isms to “jump species.” Promi­nent researchers famil­iar with these efforts expressed alarm and the con­vic­tion that such work should be out­lawed, lest it lead to the cre­ation of new, dead­ly organ­isms that would infect humans.

Obvi­ous­ly, this broad­cast and the line of inquiry approached in Mr. Emory’s decades-long inves­ti­ga­tion of AIDS as a man-made dis­ease high­light the possibility/probability/near cer­tain­ty that HIV is just such an organ­ism.

The pro­gram con­cludes with review of an excerpt from tes­ti­mo­ny before a House appro­pri­a­tions sub­com­mit­tee that was draw­ing up the defense bud­get for the fol­low­ing year. (The hear­ings were in 1969.) The tes­ti­mo­ny dis­cuss­es the pos­si­bil­i­ty of using genet­ic engi­neer­ing to pro­duce a dis­ease that would be “refrac­to­ry” to the immune sys­tem. This is vir­tu­al­ly the clin­i­cal def­i­n­i­tion of AIDS. It is worth not­ing that the project was fund­ed, and just such a disease—AIDS—appeared in just the time frame posit­ed. It is also worth not­ing that, in the 2002 edi­tion of A High­er Form of Killing, this pas­sage is omit­ted!!

A High­er Form of Killing; Robert Har­ris and Jere­my Pax­man; Hill and Wang [SC]; ISBN 0–8090-5471‑X; p. 241 (p. 266 in e‑book).

. . . As long ago as 1962, forty sci­en­tists were employed at the U.S. Army bio­log­i­cal war­fare lab­o­ra­to­ries on full-time genet­ics research. ‘Many oth­ers,’ it was said, ‘appre­ci­ate the impli­ca­tions of genet­ics for their own work.’ The impli­ca­tions were made more spe­cif­ic that genet­ic engi­neer­ing could solve one of the major dis­ad­van­tages of bio­log­i­cal war­fare, that it is lim­it­ed to dis­eases which occur nat­u­ral­ly some­where in the world. ‘With­in the next 5 to 10 years, it would prob­a­bly be pos­si­ble to make a new infec­tive micro-organ­ism which could dif­fer in cer­tain impor­tant respects from any known dis­ease-caus­ing organ­isms. Most impor­tant of these is that it might be refrac­to­ry to the immuno­log­i­cal and ther­a­peu­tic process­es upon which we depend to main­tain our rel­a­tive free­dom from infec­tious dis­ease.’ [Ital­ics are Mr. Emory’s.] The pos­si­bil­i­ty that such a ‘super germ’ may have been suc­cess­ful­ly pro­duced in a lab­o­ra­to­ry some­where in the world in the years since that assess­ment was made is one which should not be too read­i­ly cast aside. . . .

Pro­gram High­lights Include: Lit­ton Bio­net­ics’ work on the Mason-Pfiz­er mon­key virus while under con­tract to the NCI and when it employed Dr. Robert Gal­lo; research empha­sis on “zoonoses” (dis­eases that jump from ani­mals to humans) by the joint military/civilian con­sor­tium; Gal­lo’s work with NCI VCP/Ft. Det­rick vet­er­an Dr. Jack Gru­ber in a mass viral inoc­u­la­tion pro­gram under­tak­en by Lit­ton Bio­net­ics; the use of the Mason-Pfiz­er mon­key virus in the Lit­ton Bio­net­ics mass inoc­u­la­tion pro­gram.

Custom Search

Recommended Reading

Family of Secrets Family of Secrets The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, and What Their Influence Means for America Read more »