How can it be know with any certainty that SARS is not a terrorist attack? As far as I can see there have been no cases of SARS in any Middle Eastern country as of yet.
Well, one indication is, if everyone in the Middle Eastern countries was vaccinated against SARS in advance (necessary to achieve the result you mention), it would not have been possible to keep it secret.
There have likewise been no cases of SARS in the whole, generically Catholic, South American continent. Another data point to account for.
That requires some pretty gigantic assumptions, doesn’t it? There are Muslim countries not in the Middle East, and Middle Eastern countries that are not Islamic. Also, there’s zero reason to think it IS a terrorist thing. Little matter of evidence there. 
http://content.health.msn.com/content/article/62/71672.htm#
This article shows a suspected case in Kuwait. The fact that it’s mostly hit Asian countries would suggest, if it’s terrorism, it’s a group who hates Asians, not Americans.
Well, for starters, the Middle East is about as far from Southeast Asia as you can get, so it shouldn’t be surprising that it’s among the areas not yet infected.
Plus, if it were engineered to be a weapon, whoever did the engineering frankly did a piss-poor job on the one hand, with its fairly low fatality rate, but an amazing job on the other hand, making an animal virus turn into a deadly human virus in the lab.
AFAIK, all cases can be traced back to the initial outbreak in China. If you were a terrorist, especially one with allegiance to one side in the Middle East “conflict”, why would you introduce your viral weapon in the middle of China?
The OP is timely:
Source: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/01/1056825375795.html
In fact, from what I’ve read anthrax probably isn’t the best choice for a weapon, given it’s low rate of transmission. That might play into the previous post about the flu.
How do you figure that? Try checking a globe.
Not that that’s relevant; what really grates about this thread is the suggestion that Middle Eastern countries are hotbeds of terrorism, and that the fact that Sars hasn’t struck in the Middle East is somehow suspicious. It hasn’t struck the USA either, to the best of my knowledge. Is that evidence of some sinister Republican plot? Get a clue.
How can it be known with any certainty that Regis Filbin is not a terrorist attack? After all, there is no good evidence that he has ever appeared in any Arab country.
The main reason why SARS is very unlikely to be of terrorist origin IMO is that no terrorist group has claimed responsibility.
Terrorism is about causing fear and disruption, but the effort of bringing this fear and disruption about is wasted for the terrorists if no connection to them/their issue is made in the public’s mind.