Steve Quayle News Alerts

July 10, 2002
By Martin Dillon

The decision to vaccinate half a million US front-line health workers has again raised the specter of a biological attack.

News of this latest move to protect Americans from terrorism immediately led to increased fear among ordinary people and a plethora of news stories speculating about the likelihood of an attack.

The US Intelligence community believes the short-term risk of such an attack in the short term is low-level. But behind the move lies a real fear that over the next five to ten years America will indeed be the target for the release of the smallpox virus.

The theory behind vaccinating 500,000 front-line responders is that they will be in a position to act quickly to deal with an infected area should terrorists release the virus in a major city.

Presently there is not enough vaccine to inoculate the entire population though that may change within twelve months.

Some medical experts favor “ring inoculation.”

Once an attack occurs, much like the investigative method used to trace Aids, those infected would be quarantined and questioned. Acting like detectives, the front-line responders will attempt to identify the carriers of the virus and those likely to have been infected through contact with them.

The argument for “ring inoculation” centers on two – not always sustainable- assertions.

Once infected, there is a 4-day window when an infected person can be vaccinated before the virus reaches a critical mass within the body. However, it is 14 days before real symptoms are apparent. Therefore, what front line responders will be doing is acting in a reflex manner – backtracking to the source. If their detective work is not successful, the virus will spread.

An infected area through this form of inoculation can be contained. Again, there is an inherent flaw in the argument. The virus could be spread by the free-flow travel system of the United States and it would be impossible to ring-off areas. There is also the time factor and fear of being quarantined could drive infected people underground.

The other alternative is to vaccinate the entire population. Such a move would protect every individual for 5 to 10 years. Presently there is not enough vaccine available and there are health risks.

The potential for death from the vaccine is one in a million, with serious health risks for one in every one hundred thousand inoculated. For many people that risk is minimal compared with the feeling of security the majority would have if there were national vaccination.

Some Americans have been traveling abroad to be vaccinated in countries where there are large stocks of the vaccine and no apparent threat from a smallpox attack.

Within the next year, as the US builds its stocks of the smallpox vaccine, there will be a growing demand for people to make their own choices about whether to get the smallpox jab.

Within the US intelligence community there is a real fear that plans underway in the war against terrorism may well heighten the risk of a smallpox attack.

Should the US go it alone in a new war against Iraq, the potential for a biochemical attack against US troops and the mainland United States will become a probability.

After the global eradication of smallpox in 1980, there had been a mistaken belief that the only stores of the virus were under secure control in Russia and the United States.

“We now know that was not the case,” a US intelligence source told Globe-Intel. “North Korea, Iran and Iraq have been developing a Bio-weapons program and the creation of the smallpox virus has been high on their agenda. We are almost certain that Iraq has supplies of smallpox.”

Terrorist experts had always reckoned that terrorists would be unlikely to release smallpox because its contagious nature would make them its first victims.

The events of 9/11 reversed that thesis when it became clear that terrorists were prepared to die to achieve their goals.

In the Pentagon, there is a growing belief that Saddam Hussein may reach a point when, knowing his regime is going to be toppled, he will decide to “take down a lot of innocent Americans.”

“Saddam may already have terrorist cells supplied with chemical and biological weapons. They could be under orders to release them when he is about to go under,” the Intelligence source added.

While it has been difficult to prove a connection between the Iraqi regime and Al-Qaeda, there are few experts who doubt that it has existed. The “success” of Al-Qaeda points to state-intelligence support and, Saddam is known to have harbored a desire for revenge since his humiliation in the Gulf War.

In recent years, Iraq has been a mecca for a number of Islamic organizations. In secret camps, terrorists have been trained in hijacking and the dispersal of chemical weapons.

It may be no coincidence that, as plans are laid to remove Saddam from power, there is now a move to vaccinate first responders in the US.

The fear present in the US is not without justification yet it needs to be kept under control by a clear statement of the facts. There is little point in the Administration talking about a low-level threat from a smallpox attack while announcements are made about vaccinating front-line responders and there is a fast-tracked production of large quantities of the smallpox vaccine.

In the aftermath of 9/11, there is no political or intelligence value in hiding the truth. At this moment in time it is difficult to understand how the threat-level is assessed except through hard intelligence. Yet, as we have all discovered, preventing attacks by state-sponsored terrorists is often not possible.

Returning to New York after several months in Europe, I am struck by the fear factor in the US while Europeans appear relatively unconcerned about the global threat from terrorism.

In some media and political circles in Europe, there is what I can only describe as a growing cynicism towards the US and its ally, Israel.

That has permeated downwards to street level where many people blame the US and Israel for heightening tension in the Middle East.

On the European Continent, that is only to be expected. There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism and left-wing support for the PLO in countries such as France and Germany – a factor that has not shifted much since the 1970s.

Within the ruling British Labour Party the erosion of support for the US war against terrorism is of more worrying concern. Leading Labour Cabinet members have warned British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, that he will not have their support in a war against Iraq.

The genesis of much of this anti-American and anti-Israel sentiment has its roots in a European tendency to believe that if Europe plays a low-key role in terms of the Islamic terrorist threat, Europe will be spared an attack similar to 9/11.

It is inherently a dangerous gamble. While the US and Israel are writ large on the terrorists’ attack agenda, other Western nations are not excluded from the hatred fueling terrorist designs.

The period post the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center provided lessons not learned even after the embassy bombings and the attack on the USS Cole. But after 9/11 there are lessons we all must address:

Terrorists are long-term people. What may happen tomorrow may have been in the planning stage for several years.

Targets of opportunity could just as easily include a high-profile target in a NATO country.

Terrorists will now kill the maximum people for effect, using whatever weapon of mass destruction they can acquire. Nuclear technology is no longer secret. Chemical and Bio-weapons are not out of their reach. Cyberwarfare plans to attack US military and commercial digital infrastructure is already on the terrorists’ agenda.

The word terrorist should not be used in a narrow context. It could be applied to Iraq, North Korea and Iran just as easily as to an organization such as Al-Qaeda, Islamic Jihad or the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.

http://www.globe-intel.net/