Real conspiracies?

I realize that every quack out there has some sort of bird brained conspiracy theory. None the less, this particular conspiracy seems to fly. Did the government actually test biowarfare on its citizens or am I just being a goose?


But the recently revised U.S. Code Title 50, Section 1520 states that the Secretary of Defense may conduct tests or experiments “involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population” - if they are related to research activity.

The law also stipulates that biowarfare tests can be carried out on Americans only if Congress is notified 30 days in advance, and “only if informed consent to the testing was obtained from each human subject in advance of the testing on that subject.”

There is plenty of pattern and precedent to suggest that clandestine biowarfare experiments were routinely practiced on the American public without their informed consent. Two congressional investigations in 1977 and 1994 - and recently declassified British defense documents - detail 50 years of “open air” testing that used ships and spray-equipped aircraft to spread biological warfare simulants on hundreds of cities across the U.S., Canada and the U.K.

As recently as 1997, 61 secret tests sprayed the residents of Minneapolis with germ warfare simulants over a period of several months. Respiratory illness increased sharply in the sprayed areas.

Even as aerial atomic detonations were being conducted upwind of cities, American airborne biowarfare tests began in earnest in 1957 and 1958, when a cargo plane criss-crossed the country, spraying highly toxic zinc cadmium sulfide chemicals. A U.S. Army report states that “virtually, the whole country of the United States was covered with this material.”

Prof. Leonard Cole testified at the first congressional investigation into large area biowarfare experiments. The author of Clouds of Secrecy described how “The plane would take off from the Canadian border, and fly slowly down to the Gulf of Mexico. These materials would be spread, and were found to be landing as far away as New York State. So, you know that, as the air would push the zinc cadmium particles around, most of the people who were residents of the United States during that time were inhaling at least some of the zinc
cadmium sulfide. And the cadmium in that compound was clearly known then to be toxic, even in small amounts.”

In the Sixties and Seventies, British germ-warfare trials spread Bacillus globigii and E. coli from a ship and a Canberra bomber converted with stainless steel tanks and sprayers.

For people with breathing problems or poor immune systems, these bacteria can cause septicemia, fever, pneumonia and chest infections.

Congress also learned that in 1956, U.S. military personnel released mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Georgia and Avon Park, Florida. Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials tested victims for the effective spread of this disease.

In 1966, U.S. Army bioweaponeers dispensed Bacillus subtilis variant Niger throughout the New York City subway system. More than a million civilians were exposed when army scientists dropped lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto ventilation grates. Similar biowarfare canisters were released in London subways.

In 1977, Senate hearings found that 239 U.S. populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between 1949 and 1969. Some of the areas included San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Key West, Panama
City, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.



Um, okay. I would first point out that you don’t “test” a bio/chem agent on the whole of your country’s population. What if it proved successful?

for some details of very well-documented administration of chemical agents to the american citizenry, read this thread.

any questions or stuff not dealt with, fire away.

Cecil Adams on Contrails/chemtrails.

** manhattan ** - Yes. I read that. Though this is slightly different in that it concerns direct goverment testing on people.

Ok… the last site wasn’t probably too creditable, but how about this one?
or this

This is really buggin the heck out of me… these two sites don’t seem to be your average “psycho” sites. It’s just been very hard for me to find any legal documents on this kind of stuff… (mostly because it’s a pain to sort through all of it)

Has anyone heard of any of these kind of things before, or could anyone offer some reliable evidence if such things did happen? (Or didn’t happen if you’ve got such a thing.)

This is driving me up the wall.

Well, according to a reputable British newspaper:

Scandal of nerve gas tests (3 September 1999)

It’s not about tests on unsuspecting civilians, but “allegations that military personnel were tricked into taking part in chemical warfare experiments at Porton Down” (Britain’s NBC research establishment). Test figures were collected by a left-wing MP from figures at the Public Records Office.

The key word in the passage quoted by the OP is “simulants”. A biological weapon simulant is not a biological weapon, it’s just a fine powder (usually made from dried chicken, as I recall) that disperses in the atmosphere in much the same way that a genuine biological agent would. Vegetarians might get upset about inhaling it, I suppose, but without the pathogenic payload, the concentration is way too low to have any effect on people. Has the government actually tested simulants on unsuspecting civilians? I don’t know, and frankly, it doesn’t really matter.

Ted said

You’re right, I would call them above average psycho sites. :}

Seriously, they put forth know incidences of human testing, but mix it in with inuendo and unproven stories.

as quoted by dale gribble on king of the hill:
Them Damn Mexicans With their Wild-Like Conspiraces against us hard workin’ US citizens!

samclem - I’m just trying to sort out “fact” from fiction. It’s a real pain too.

I think I might have found where the lightbulb story had come from:

It lists one of the sources at the bottom as:
United States Army, U.S. Army Activity in the U.S. Biological Warfare Programs vol 2.

Has anyone else here done any research into the claims made here:

This seems to be the most frequently reoccuring document… problem is it doesn’t use a single source, which is one heck of a pain… and a lot of the names shrug

I’m just trying to sort through what’s real, what’s obviously made up, and what is uncertian.
I guess what is really throwing me off too, is that I recal a while ago seeing a “documentary” on the history channel about the cold war which made many of these very same claims (more specficly the ones with the lightbulbs being broken in the subways).

Now I’m not saying that I’d use the history channel as a diffinitive source… but none the less it makes me want to get to the bottom of some of these claims all the more so.

I’m finaly starting to find some actualy reliable information on the subject (I’m just approaching the whole light bulb angle in 1966)

It seems that the stuff that went on in 1966 wasn’t to test the biological product itself, but rather to test how dangerous it would be, and how to deal with it.
(the paper cites: 12. Robert Harris and Jeremy Paxman, A Higher Form of Killing (New York: Hill and Wang, 1982), p. 158. … I’ll have to see if I can find a copy somewhere)

it’s interesting how that kind of experiment could turn into this:

To finaly this:

I guess the more pariniod you are, the more likely your going to see things that probably aren’t there…

Still, it does bug me that the US goverment conducted on the populace without their knowledge. I don’t really want to be part of a biological warfare experiment even if the germs they are releasing are nontoxic. I wonder if the Antrax could have mutated?
shudder that would be a scary thought… though they probably knew enough not to take such a chance, right? =]

Well, I would think that there must be some types of biological weapon surrogates that spread and behave the same way the actual components would but are harmless and easily traceable in even minute quantities that allow a measure of their spread.

Assuming extensive animal tests are done first and shown to be harmless, followed by testing on volunteers in a clinical phase I regulatory setting, it would seem plausible to me that the government might conduct basic containment and spread tests in quasi-public places. The idea not being to make people sick, but instead to account for what a real life situation might entail in terms of how best to prepare an emergency response.

If this is done, the fact the public isn’t told wouldn’t surprise me only because every asshole with a lawyer would be blaming everything from their child’s headaches to their tooth decay on the test and it would become a legal minefield. These same people, of course, would line up to sue the government for not properly preparing for a disaster as well if a real terrorist group ever released something. So pick which side of the double edged sword you want.

And before this turns into a great debate, let me say that I do not trust the government in general, but I find it hard to believe that our government would KNOWINGLY hurt its own citizens. Yeah, I know…Agent Orange and the Vietnam War…but knowing the legal implications plus the lost tax dollars of killing your own people :slight_smile: …why do it? If you want to test your great new weapon in a real world setting, you’d think you’d want more controlled conditions anyway (like an island) and you could hurt non-US citizens who couldn’t take the same legal action against you. Why drop chemical on people in Minnesota when logically you’d get better experiemental results dropping it on an island chain in say…the Caribbean

Last summer 7 people died in the NYC area due to “west nile virus” (more people died from the flu). Anyway, dead birds were found with the virus, which is spread by mosquitoes. 7 dead people, a few dead birds this year, and now we have helicopters spraying the tri-state area and trucks rolling down the street spraying out this crap. All this for a virus which Guiilianni sez has effects of “mild headache” and nausea in most people who get it. I think shooting the pepsi girl would stop the symptoms more efficiently.

A couple links I found related to the topic:

Lengthy DOE report on nuclear testing and human radiation exposure experiments
Registry of Atmospheric Testing Survivors