Bio-Terror Canada

[rumbleph1$h]

Bio-Terror Canada

By David Warren

November 25, 2005

Ottawa Citizen

Anyone familiar with their websites will know that a bio-terror attack claiming millions of lives has been the waking dream of Islamist fanatics for some time now -- a fantasy preferred even to alternative nuclear or chemical attacks. It is because of this, and because such a bio-attack would be easier to pull off, that Interpol arranged the first of three major conferences, in Cape Town this week -- to brief medics and police from several dozen countries on what they can do to prepare for it. The attack itself is ?inevitable?, according to Ron Noble, the Interpol director.

I also think it is inevitable. Yet the preparations for such an attack strike me as modest, diffident, even fatalistic, given the scale of catastrophe in view. The assumption is, we can't really do anything about it until it happens.

It is what we do AFTER it happens that is thus the real issue. And that is what we could more comprehensively discuss, to make an impression on our enemies. I am not so much thinking of the public health response, for that will be complete chaos. I am rather thinking, what steps we will take, after the plague has subsided, to eliminate ?Islamism?. For we have only to imagine 10 million dead, to imagine a Western electorate prepared to do whatever is necessary to achieve that end, promptly.

In passing: I wouldn't necessarily worry as much as the conference delegates about a "suicide bio-weapon" -- i.e. Islamist terrorists infecting themselves, and then wandering around densely populated cities. For as I?ve noted before, they have consistently selected painless "exit strategies" for themselves. They have only ever manifested the sort of courage that requires endurance of pain when placed in the "cornered rat" position (usually by members of the United States Marine Corps). I think the postal anthrax attack on the U.S. in 2001 is a better predictor of Islamist methodology. (In contradiction of the U.S. authorities, I also remain convinced it was an intended follow-up to the air attacks of 9/11/01.)

People with the facility to put two and two together -- and get four -- should realize that Canada is the likeliest target for such a bio-terror attack. The United States would be ideal, since the U.S. precedes even Israel as the subject of Islamist hatred. But it is not therefore the more likely immediate target. The great effort that is being made to secure American borders (likely to increase as the isolationist impulse grows), and the general effort of Homeland Security (however incompetent) make hitting the U.S. directly a dicier proposition. Canada has the merit, from an Islamist point of view, of more open borders and less suspicious authorities. Yet a pathogen would cross the border easily, no matter what security were in place. So why take the risks of starting it there, when they could more easily start it here?

Europe could be ruled out, as a first choice, because in the Islamist mind, Europe is already in the process of becoming Islamic territory, by demographic progression. Of course the fallout from a bio-terror attack could quickly become planetary -- but THAT is the sort of hypothetical risk with which Islamists are characteristically undisturbed.

We now have large and concentrated Muslim immigrant communities in such cities as Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, and London, Ont., to provide the necessary cover during preparations. And as the pathetic, ?politically correct? response of Mayor Miller and his police chief to gang warfare in Toronto?s streets has shown, the possibility of determined police action can be thrown off by the semblance of a shadow of the threat of a charge of police ?racism?. Not since Indonesia, in the months before the 2002 attack on Bali nightclubs, has a country so advertised its desire to be ?sucker-punched? by terrorists feeling the constraints of police action elsewhere. Canada again becomes the target of choice.

Moreover, we can provide the terrorists with the weapons they need, without the inconvenience of crossing international frontiers. What isn?t available over the counter from pharmacies, or by mail order, could be obtained from the poorly-secured stocks of a public hospital via sympathetic or blackmailed staff. The means to launch a smallpox epidemic -- or to disseminate anthrax, botulism, or an Ebola-style virus -- are all available locally. The U.S. scientists who ingeniously re-created the 1918 ?Spanish flu? that killed more people than the First World War, thoughtfully published their accomplishment so it could be reproduced anywhere in the developed world. There is really no end of possibilities.

It is from the contemplation of such facts, that persons of sound mind may deduce what is necessary to avoid an attack. We cannot possibly eliminate the means, without also eliminating everything that makes our society technologically advanced. We must instead find and eliminate the people who want to kill us. This, incidentally, is the pro-active strategy President Bush and company embarked upon, about Sept. 20th, 2001. But perhaps it wasn?t bold enough.

[MadFerIt]

Another bloody extremely biased article. Can't you post anything else? This time it's from my country too, which also has people like this.

Any man who would say this: "I am rather thinking, what steps we will take, after the plague has subsided, to eliminate ?Islamism?." has no respect from me. To even suggest what he does (and how does he even think this can be accomplished?) takes a truly closeminded dare I even say demented human being.

[rumbleph1$h]

Another bloody extremely biased article.  Can't you post anything else?

586853611[/snapback]

Do you think I actually give two ****s about flamers like you? Let's be realistic here. I post essays that I find interesting. I don't expect everyone to agree with them, nor do I always agree. Entertain the ideas presented without accepting them. Rectify any information presented that you know to be false. Then get on with your life. ;)

[Boffa Jones Veteran]

Also, wasn't the anthrax guy caucasian?

[MadFerIt]

Do you think I actually give two ****s about flamers like you? Let's be realistic here. I post essays that I find interesting. I don't expect everyone to agree with them, nor do I always agree. Entertain the ideas presented without accepting them. Rectify any information presented that you know to be false. Then get on with your life.  ;)

586853693[/snapback]

How does commenting on your bias and discrediting the discriminating nature of the article "flaming"?

And if you don't always agree with the article's you post, how come you post articles extremely similar to this one frequently? Do you mean to say you disagree with most of your own posted articles?

I just get annoyed when people are so bloody bias. Once I see a counterpart to you on the left he'll also get an similar view on his articles/posts.

[raid517]

Do you think I actually give two ****s about flamers like you? Let's be realistic here. I post essays that I find interesting. I don't expect everyone to agree with them, nor do I always agree. Entertain the ideas presented without accepting them. Rectify any information presented that you know to be false. Then get on with your life.?;))

586853693[/snapback]

It's always a very particular kind of article though isn't it? Essentially its all 'Muslims are trash, kill all Muslims, Muslims don't deserve to breath the same air as everyone else.' If it's not about that, its always about how everyone else in the world is trash - and how only America and Americans are really any good. (So OK I'm paraphrasing a little, but that's the gist of it, isn't it?)

Are you really saying you don't agree with these opinions? If so why not post your own objections - instead of continually posting these frequently offensive articles? Or are you really just trying to hide behind the aricles you post - because 'hey, you can't get into trouble - because it wasn't you who said them'?

Perhaps if you ever posted another article that didn't express views like these, most of the people here wouldn't mistake you as sharing similar views too.

GJ

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

It's always a very particular kind of article though isn't it? Essentially its all 'Muslims are trash, kill all Muslims, Muslims don't deserve to breath the same air as everyone else.' If it's not about that, its always about how everyone else in the world is trash - and how only America and Americans are really any good. (So OK I'm paraphrasing a little, but that's the gist of it, isn't it?)

Are you really saying you don't agree with these opinions? If so why not post your own objections - instead of continually posting these frequently offensive articles? Or are you really just trying to hide behind the aricles you post - because 'hey, you can't get into trouble - because it wasn't you who said them'?

Perhaps if you ever posted another article that didn't express views like these, most of the people here wouldn't mistake you as sharing similar views too.

GJ

586853849[/snapback]

:yes: :yes: :yes:

I'm glad I wasn't the only one to notice this trend.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

Also, wasn't the anthrax guy caucasian?

586853713[/snapback]

This reporter knows more than the entire US administration apparantly.

I think the postal anthrax attack on the U.S. in 2001 is a better predictor of Islamist methodology. (In contradiction of the U.S. authorities, I also remain convinced it was an intended follow-up to the air attacks of 9/11/01.)

[Boffa Jones Veteran]

Yeah thats what made me think about that. I remember some white guy being walked with the police in connection with that.