By Nick Dial

A common phrase seen and heard used by protesters the last several years is “separation of church and state” This phrase has been used to protest the mention of God in the Pledge of Allegiance, school, curriculum, nativity scenes in public, and even gay marriage. So….does separation of church and state apply to these activities and venues?  This is where people must dust off that old history book to find the real intentions behind what “separation of church and state” really means.

When our founding fathers wrote the Constitution there was sound reasoning behind why they made specific reference to religion. The U.S. Colonies had lived under the thumb of King George III for some time and had grown weary of monarchy rule and the arbitrary law that came with it. Religions other than the Church of England had been suppressed for quite some time so much so that, the Puritans settled in the Americas in order to freely practice their religion. This was nothing new to the founding fathers; they knew this history as well as anyone else.

The term “separation of church and state” is not found anywhere in the US Constitution.  The phrase was made popular by Thomas Jefferson when he wrote a letter defending the rights of a group of Baptists to practice their faith.

“The Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature — as “favors granted.” (U.S. Constitution, 2010).

Since then Jefferson’s words have often been used out of context and, unfortunately, by those who misunderstand the very reasons the First Amendment addresses the issue.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states : “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (Us constitution, 2010).

The key words regarding this issue are the following: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.

Again, we need to look at history to understand the reasoning behind their position. We know that the Puritans came from the Old World to escape religious persecution so that they could practice their faith freely. Europe’s, and especially England’s, long history of religious oppression was the reason for inclusion of the phrase “make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. Although none of Europe was particularly religiously tolerant, the oppression reached intolerable levels during the rule of King Henry VIII. In the sixteenth century, King Henry had failed to have a son born in order to retain a male heir to the throne. There had already been tension between the authorities in Rome and England for some time. King Henry went to the Pope requesting that his marriage be annulled. He was refused. He had fallen in love with a new woman, Ann Boleyn, and wished to be married to her in place of his current wife. After refusal from the Pope, the king met with his closest advisors and developed a novel idea.

“When he met with failure, Henry did what every other king would do. He fired his closest advisor. This was an important move. His closest advisor on the matter was Cardinal Wolsey, the Lord Chancellor of England. The negotiations with the papal court were largely carried out by Wolsey. When he failed, Henry dismissed and arrested him and replaced him with Thomas Cranmer and Thomas Cromwell. Both these men were sympathetic to the new ideas of Martin Luther. They gave the king some radical advice: if the pope does not grant the annulment, then split the English church off from the Roman church. Rather than the pope, the king would be the spiritual head of the English church. If the King wants an annulment, then the King can grant his own annulment” Protestant England, 2010).

Taking the advice of his advisors King Henry did just that. England broke off from Roman Catholic Church, and the Church of England was formed. King Henry was then declared head of the church and was free to annul any marriage he wished. When the Church of England was created it became the official church of the kingdom and an act against the king was viewed as an act against God. This is the very reason why the founding fathers put safeguards such as the First Amendment in place. They knew from their own history the dangers of a church being part of the government and the abuses permitted under a state religion.

The founding fathers were logical men. The point of the First Amendment was to keep any religion from becoming a state sponsored religion, not the government being supported by those of faith or any reference to faith. If their intent was to keep any reference of God or faith out of government, they would not have made such bold statements about their beliefs in God and God’s role in our granted freedoms.

In the Declaration of Independence they wrote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”.  George Washington himself called for a national day of prayer during the Revolutionary War.

The notion of keeping God or faith out of governmental matters, or public displays of faith was never the intent behind the first amendment. It was there to keep religions from being empowered by government support and turning into a tool of tyranny. Today, due to lack of understanding and revisionist history behind the First Amendment’s purpose, we see people taking things completely out of context to fit their world views. The First Amendment has nothing to do with the concept of God in school, gay marriage, abortion, or any other political issue involving religion. Being an advocate for or against such things and publicly announcing it is fine, that’s what America is all about.  Before you rush out with a sign saying such things as “separation of church and state” keep one thing in mind; if you don’t learn the history behind what you are saying and its true meaning you will accomplish nothing except make yourself look foolish.

References

Protestant england. (2010). Retrieved from

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/REFORM/ENGLAND.HTM

Us constitution. (2010). Retrieved from

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am1.html

By Nick Dial

The debates people have over airport security consist of profiling, invasion of privacy, and check- in time. 

“Profiling” has become a buzzword in today’s media with such a derogatory connotation it has become something of a dirty word. Today, profiling immediately gets related to abuse of power and unjust treatment. The fact is that profiling is necessary to effectively perform any real security and determent of crime.

On January 28, 2008 a covert tester for the Transportation Security Administration was able to sneak a mock bomb past airport security checkpoints undetected. According to CNN:

“ Jason – that’s the name CNN was asked to call him – slides a simulated explosive into an elastic back support. The mock bomb is as slim as a wallet; its fuse, the size of a cigarette. He wraps the support around his torso, and the bomb fits comfortably into the small of his back” (Meserve, Jeanne, Ahlers, Mike, 2008).

What is a “mock bomb?”  It is a small, concealable device with a fuse that is replicated to look and feel as its real counterpart. The scary part is that this stealthy act of terrorism can be executed at any time.

In the days following 9/11 people were willing to sacrifice small inconveniences in the exchange for added security and peace of mind. People are starting to forget the issues that surrounded 9/11 and the reason added security was necessary. Since there has not been another successful attack since 9/11, awareness has dropped and complaints have come in earnest about the added security. George Santayana wrote, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. In this case, the complacency beginning to be displayed only invites another attack – and once again, history repeats itself.

Racial profiling is a touchy topic, but one that should be examined thoroughly and honestly. The problem with discussions of profiling today is that people are not applying critical thinking to the topic. For example, police officers must profile when they patrol. They are, in fact, paid professional profilers. Every time they patrol they are observing their surroundings for activity that is suspicious. There are many factors that come into play that must be addressed, and yes, race is one of them. For example, let’s say an officer is patrolling in the middle of the night in a known predominately black neighborhood. The officer knows the history and surroundings of the area. He may also know that there is a rift between a white gang and black gang in that area. The white guy is wearing dark baggy clothing. At this point the officer must ask them self the following questions:

1. Are white people commonly in the area?
2. Are people normally in the area in the middle of the night?
3. Do members of the rival gang wear baggy dark clothing, or clothing of similar appearance?
4. Are the chances of this person being in this area going to lead to a confrontation?

These questions need to be examined critically and analytically. If most or all of these questions can be answered “yes”, would the officer be unjustly racially profiling for stopping the person to speak with them?  The answer is no. There is a difference between profiling strictly based off of race, and profiling based on multiple factors. Race may be a contributing factor, but it is not the only factor. In this example, there is more than reasonable probable cause for the officer to suspect an issue may be at hand. The suspect is not breaking any laws by being there, however it is not unreasonable to engage the person in conversation in order to investigate. If nothing else the officer may offer to give the man a ride or notify him of the dangers of being in an unsafe part of town. The job of the officer is to protect all of the public, even if the man is a gang member.

With the previous example in mind let’s shift the situation to an airport. We must use what we currently know to combat the threats to the air traveler – in this case terrorism. We place a lot of responsibility on TSA, and they are charged with keeping hundreds of thousands of travelers safe as they go through these ports. To realistically combat the threat of terror, we must have guidelines in place to narrow down the search for the best results. If TSA treated an eighty year old grandmother as a suspect, we would be wasting valuable resources unless there was reasonable suspicion ahead of time to investigate such a person. With the issue of terrorism, here is what we know. There have been many terror attacks worldwide in the past 20 years. Of those, several have been directed toward the United States. The U.S.S. Cole was bombed by young Middle Eastern men. The First World Trade Center bombing was carried out by young Middle Eastern men. 9/11 was perpetrated by young Middle Eastern men, Arabs to be specific, and the recent plot of 2006 in England, where British authorities prevented the bombing of several U.S. bound planes, was being attempted by young Middle Eastern men. According to the Washington Post “Three of the four suicide attackers who killed 52 passengers in London’s transit system last summer were British citizens of Pakistani origin, investigators concluded. The fourth was identified as a Jamaican-born convert to Islam” (Ward, John, 2006).  Based off this information, the ongoing perception of terror plots being carried by young Middle Eastern men or of Middle East decent is a correct one. They clearly state that three of the four men were of Pakistani decent, and the fourth was of Jamaican decent.

We know terror is real, and we know its threat continues to push our security to the limit. History shows a clear correlation between young men recruited by terror cells, especially men of Middle Eastern decent.  Is it unreasonable for their age and ethnicity to be a red flag?  Some may say yes, some may say, no. It could be argued that history shows it’s not illogical to place this at the top of many considerations when investigating a suspect. To disregard this fact would be foolish and naive. There is a clear history of bank robbers wearing ski mask, and if you walk into a bank with a mask on, it’s almost a guarantee you will be profiled and treated with apprehension from the moment you walk in the door. This is only logical- and what we know from history supports this apprehension.

When it comes to security and expectations of the public, we must remember we do not live in a perfect world. While “political correctness” works on paper, it rarely applies in real world security situations. If we want our safety guaranteed, or at the very least have our safety a top priority, then we must be willing to make certain compromises. We can’t have it both ways and expect an effective outcome.

References

Meserve, Jeanne, and Mike Ahlers. “TSA tester slips mock bomb past airport security.” CNN (2008): n. pag. Web. 24 Sep 2009.

Ward John, . “Plot to bomb U.S. bound jets is foiled.” Washington Pots (2006): n. pag. Web. 24 Sep 2009. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/10/AR2006081000152.html

By Nick Dial

Many people may not be aware that terrorism has a long history. While there has been a steady history of atrocities committed, it is the advent of modern day technologies that brings terrorism to our living rooms for all to see. It can no longer be ignored or neglected as much as it was before. To better understand modern terrorism, you must first take a look at the history behind it.

Terrorism has a long history, getting its roots during the French Revolution. The term terrorism was coined by Edmund Burke in the 18^th century. He was referring to the brutal reform that had taken place by the revolutionist. They had decapitated thousands in public with little trial or justice of any kind. Since then, the term terrorism has taken many different meanings. Napoleon referenced resistance fighters during his world conquest as “terrorist”. The Germans did the same during WWII referring to any resistance, which was not recognized by an official military or government as “terrorist”. Today the meaning is drastically different. The FBI defines terrorism as the following: “The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (White, 2008, P. 7). Depending on where you live in the world may bring different definition of terrorism. The popular saying “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” may ring true in some cases, however I would argue Islamic jihad terrorism does not fall into this category. A freedom fighter must fight for true freedom, such as the French Resistance did against the Nazi occupation. Militant Islamic Jihad fights for the spread of Islamic purity law and Jihad (struggle or effort, now referred to as holy war). This law allows the oppression, abuse, and murder of women. Women cannot vote, drive, or move freely in public. This law even goes to extremes such as not allowing someone to carry tomatoes and cucumbers in the same basket, for this is a “sexual innuendo”. This law has no tolerance for people of diverse faith. All who oppose this ideology, Muslim included are regarded as enemy and therefore need to be eliminated, only then will true Islam be restored. The most who suffer from this ideology are Muslims themselves.

Modern day terrorism is dominated by Islamic Jihad. This wasn’t always the case. During the 60’s and 70’s, Latin American terrorism was very active. Its structure was founded from Marxist and socialistic values. The organization of those groups is mimicked today by Islamic Jihadist groups. Many may not be aware of the roots of Militant Islam, so to better understand the roots of this ideology, an over view will be provided. Ibn Taymiyyah was an Islamic scholar in the 13^th century. He sought to find a solution to the carnage during the crusade wars. He felt through prayer, he was enlightened to bring about Jihad. He felt that Muslims had lost their way, and need to seek purification from the inside out. He referred to this as the sixth pillar of Islam and called for the destruction of all opposition.  Most Muslim scholars view Jihad as a struggle against evil. Taymiyyah took this and expanded it into more militant terms. Jonathan R. White, an expert in terrorism states the following: “Ibn Taymiyyah expanded the meaning of jihad by advocating attacks on none believers and impure Muslims” (White p. 193, 2008). The only tolerance he provided was for Muslims who conformed to this ideology. Since him, there have been various philosophers such as Abdul Wahhab, and Sayyid Qutb. Influenced by Taymiyyah, these philosophers have expanded on Taymiyyah’s militant theology and have had great influence on modern day terrorism. Osama Bin Laden is a devote follower of Qutb. Qutb teaches that all Islamic nations should impose Islamic purity law. When this is achieved, they should confront the world. Islamic terrorist leaders and organizations worldwide use these philosophers and their views as justification for their action.

Since the world trade center attacks of September 11^th 2001, new legislation was passed known as the patriot act. This legislation opened the door for various agencies’s to go after terrorism and take an aggressive offensive role. According to www.whitehouse.gov, the official website for the white house, the patriot act accomplishes the following: “The Patriot Act Eliminates Double Standards By Allowing Agents To Pursue Terrorists With The Same Tools They Use Against Other Criminals. Before the Patriot Act, it was easier to track a drug dealer’s phone contacts than a terrorist’s phone contacts, and it was easier to obtain a tax cheat’s credit card receipts than to trace the financial support of an al-Qaida fundraiser. The Patriot Act corrected these double standards – and America is safer as a result” (The white house, 2008).

Basically the patriot act has allowed such things as expediting the process of intelligence gathering. Before, the judicial process took so long to obtain warrants, that the risk of losing the information or evidence was too great. By the time they would get approval, the evidence was long gone. This allows Agency’s to get started on the Intel gathering while the warrant is being obtained. This way they don’t lose the evidence. There still needs to be an approval for the warrant at however, and any evidence gathered with failure to obtain a legal warrant will result in invalid evidence. This is referred to as “sneak and peaks”. This has become an issue of controversy in the country. Many people feel that it violates civil rights. The problem is that people are forgetting one key thing. Agencies are going after enemy combatants in this country, in the past, they would have been called SPIES! When you have national security threats from an enemy combatant, domestic civil law is often not applicable or insufficient. There is a whole new range of federal anti-espionage and foreign threat laws that come into play.

Recently the Supreme Court decided that enemy combatants on foreign battlefields will be afforded the same rights as criminals within the United States borders.  This is the first time in history this has been decided. The problem with this is the enemy will use our legal system, (which is in place to protects citizens) to exploit our media and judicial system. They don’t play by the rules, but will use the rules to work against the United States. Sometimes common sense needs to take over. This is our Achilles heel, and they will cut it every chance they get. Many argue that the patriot act does nothing to secure our safety, and that we are more vulnerable than before. According to the Heritage foundation (2007), 19 terrorist attacks have been thwarted since 9/11, some even “homegrown” right here in the United States (James J. 2007). With the rise in terror attacks all through 2009, we should be more perseverant now than ever.  Fort Hood, the Christmas bomb attempt, the shooting of military recruiters, and several more plots foiled, should serve as a clear testimony that the fight is far from over. Only through strong will and a desire to succeed will we as a nation rise above this radical ideology.

References

Carafano, James J. (2007). U.s. thwarts 19 terrorist attacks against america since 9/11. Retrieved 12/01/2008, from

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandDefense/bg2085.cfm

The white house. Retrieved December 7, 2008, from

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/patriotact/

White, J. (2008). Terrorism and homeland security (sixth edition). Belmont, Ca: Wadsworth cengage learning.

By Vanessa The “Afro-Conservative”

I’ve learned over time that the relationship between Blacks and the “government” is not as simplistic as pundits would like to make it seem.  On the one hand some liberals believe that Blacks cannot survive without government, while some conservatives believe that government need not play an active role, under any circumstances except that which is delineated in the Constitution. Both extreme positions invariably dismiss key times in history when Blacks utilized government in order to subsist, and times in history when Blacks were able to subsist without the help of bureaucracies.

During slavery, despite collective sharing between Blacks families, these families still had to rely on the slave owner for goods and resources.  Republicans understood the interdependent dynamics between the slave and slave owners.  Republicans also acknowledged how difficult it would be for Blacks if they just emancipated Blacks without any formal support systems, what we know today as “safety nets.” On March 3, 1865 the Freedman’s Bureau bill was passed primarily by Republicans in Congress and was signed by Abraham Lincoln in order to provide food, shelter, clothing, education, healthcare, and employment to newly freed Blacks. After vetoing a bill to increase the federal power of the Freedman’s bureau, Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s Democratic successor later disbanded the bureau.

After a mere 7 years of support from the Freedman’s bureau (1865-1872), Blacks began to develop informal mutual aid networks.  These mutual aid networks helped the two-parent (mother-father) survive by providing spiritual, physical, and emotional support during a very tumultuous time for Blacks.  It’s no secret that during the Great Depression, whatever White America felt, it was magnified for Black America.  Moreover, many “New Deal” initiatives, although lauded by those on the left, did very little to curtail the economic travails of Blacks.

Therefore, the Black Church was a powerful force that provided services for Blacks which included credit unions, sunday schools, job training, and various other services meant to elevate the spiritual, social, and economic standing of Blacks.

Government didn’t begin taking an active roll in the Black Community again until the 1960s.  So, needless to say for over 88+ years, Blacks were on their own.  According to the Department of Labor statistics between 1890 and 1940, Black males had slightly higher labor force participation as compared with Whites Males.  Moreover, during the time between Reconstruction and the 1960s, many Blacks began to reap the benefits of free enterprise.  For example, Greenwood, in Tusla Oklahoma, was one of the areas we know today as the “Black Wall Street.” Greenwood was home to many Black multimillionaires until the Race Riot (where Whites came in and burned down the homes and businesses of the thriving Blacks).  Even after the race riots, proving the resiliency of Blacks- Blacks still rebuilt the town and it became economically prosperous once more–until desegregation caused Blacks to stop shopping at Black owned businesses and opened the door for Blacks to fraternize White owned businesses.

Before the Black church comprised of race-hustlers, political opportunists, and prosperity pimps, the Black church enforced principles that included family cohesiveness, education, and economic stability.  Once government began to take an active roll in the lives of Blacks, the power of the Black Church in regards to setting mores (values) diminished.  Instead, a new sense of “entitlement” was unfortunately embraced.  This new formal aid network, otherwise known as “government social programs” began to dismiss the importance of the two parent (mother and father) family structure.  High illegitimacy rates which contributed to the many other social pathologies we see in the Black community are a direct result of “government programs” usurping the roll of the family, community, and Black church.

As Conservatives of all walks, we must first understand the history between the dynamics of Black people and government.  We must also acknowledge the times when government was beneficial to blacks (e.g. Freedman’s bureau) and times when  programs and initiatives were to the demise of the Black community (War on Poverty).  Currently, almost 70 percent of Black children (almost 90 percent) in the inner city are headed by single mothers.  Social scientists of all political persuasions acknowledge that these trends didn’t begin until after Liberals began to infiltrate the Black constituency.

The objective no longer remains to criticize liberals but to counteract their paternalistic policies by drafting policies and proposals that call for a re-emergence of mutual aid networks (Church, non-profits) to help with problems associated with poverty, job-readiness, drug abuse, marriage, and economic literacy that plagues the Black community.

Towsend Lett. Doctors 2001;  221: 62-67.

By Prof. Garth L. Nicolson

Bioterror and Biological Warfare agents are most often colorless, by-and-large odorless microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi) or toxins (usually protein toxins) derived from microorganisms that can be spread in air as aerosols or in food or drink to infect as many people as possible.  They are easily concealed, and thus difficult to detect before an attack.  They are also difficult to detect when released, so a biowarfare or bioterror attack would be difficult to ascertain, especially due to the usually nondescript initial signs and symptoms expected in casualties from such an attack.  Their main advantages to terrorists are allowing easy escape and causing panic and chaos within a civilian population.  Their aim is to overwhelm emergency medical departments at local hospitals and clinics.  However, there are ways to help protect yourself against bioterror agents and by extrapolation biological warfare agents and to help identify an attack when it occurs.

Terror not Casualties is the Objective

The most likely target for bioterrorism is a major city or other densely crowded areas, such as transportation hubs, major sports events or public rallies and especially government buildings.  Although recently even civilians in remote areas were frightened enough to seek medical attention for what they perceived was a bioterror attack, in reality an attack in a remote area would be extremely unlikely.  In high population density areas, the ventilation systems in large buildings might be especially temping targets, as these are rarely protected.  As we have seen, practically any delivery system can be used to penetrate an office building, even a letter delivered by the postal service.  Once an attack has occurred, most biological agents (see below) would need an incubation period of several days in order to cause sickness.  As mentioned above, this has the advantage of allowing a bioterrorist time to escape or perform undetected other acts of terrorism.  Thus a single bioterrorist could ‘hit’ several targets long before an attack was suspected.  Even with large numbers of people exhibiting nonspecific signs and symptoms within a few days after an attack, it would take some time for the medical community to recognize these events as a bioterror attack.  This is primarily due to the expected dispersed nature of patients seeking medical attention at different institutions and at different times.

The recent outbreak of inhalation anthrax in Florida and cutaneous anthrax in New York in the first week of October 2001 might be an example of a fairly restricted bioterror attack.  In this case a very modest amount of anthrax spores caused only a few casualties and one death but caused tremendous panic in the local populous.  Early reports from government agencies were directed at restoring public confidence by reassuring people that this was an isolated incident and denying that a potential bioterror attack had even occurred.  Later authorities had to admit that an attack had indeed occurred.  The lesion was that we should not expect authorities to be immediately candid about a bioterror attack.

Bioterrorism does not have to cause large numbers of immediate deaths to be effective.  Most biological agents do not cause widespread immediate fatalities, or even large numbers of deaths within days of exposure, and most exposed patients might not even have a life-threatening disease.  The main functions of bioterrorism are to cause panic, disruption and chaos, so biological agents don’t have to cause a fatal disease to be effective.  In fact, many biological warfare agents are categorized as ‘incapacitating agents’ that are not intended to produce a fatal disease (Table 1).  They are more effective if they incapacitate and produce strain on a health care system by having many thousands of sick patients inundate treatment facilities that contain only limited quantities of drugs and only a few isolation beds.  Also, it is much easier to spread an incapacitating agent from person to person, because it would not cause enough alarm to require quarantining of exposed persons, which could limit additional exposures.  Recent Ebola virus outbreaks in the Congo suggest that the most effective method to limit casualties is to quickly quarantine anyone who shows signs and symptoms of hemorrhagic fever.  Incapacitating agents often have relatively long incubation times, allowing their widespread penetration into a population before they are ever diagnosed.  Thus exposed individuals may bring the agent back ‘home’ to an unsuspecting family member and spread the disease further.  This may have happened to veterans with chronic infections, such as Mycoplasma and Brucella infections, who returned from the Gulf War only to slowly spread their chronic illnesses to spouses and children.

Biological Agents and Bioterrorism

There are several types of biological agents that could be useful for bioterrorism.  First, there are lethal agents, such as the Ebola, Lassa and other viruses that cause viral hemorrhagic fever, inhalation anthrax caused by Bacillus anthracis spores, smallpox virus, pneumonic plague caused by Yersinia pestis or purified protein toxins, such as the Ricinus communis toxin ricin or Clostridium botulinum toxin (Table 1).  In addition, there are incapacitating agents that cause brucellosis, mediated by Brucella species, Q fever caused by Coxiella burnetii, tularemia caused by Francisella tularensis, mycoplasmal infections caused by Mycoplasma fermentans and mold toxins, such as the T2 mycotoxin.  As mentioned above, incapacitating agents for the most part cause chronic illnesses that are not usually fatal.  However, these illnesses can cause tremendous chronic health problems in infected patients, and most are contagious and the disease could spread and eventually cause an epidemic of chronic illnesses.

Table 1.  Some Common Biological Warfare Agents that Can be Used for Bioterrorism

Disease                        Lethality          Incubation                   Effective           Environmental

or agent                       (death)             period                          dose                 stability

Lethal Agents

Anthrax                       high                 1-6 d                10,000-50,000 spores  very stable for years

Plague                         high                 1-6 d                100-500 organisms      stable for 1 year

Smallpox                     high                 7-17 d              10-100 organisms        very stable

Ebola virus                  high                 2-6 d                10-100 organisms        unstable

Botulism                      high                 1-5 d                0.001 mcg/Kg weight relatively stable

Ricin                            high                 1-2 d                3-5 mcg/Kg weight     stable

Cholera                        high                 1-3 d                10-500 organisms        unstable

Incapacitating Agents

Brucellosis                   low                  months                        10-100 organisms        very stable

Tularemia                    low                  2-15 d              10-50 organisms          stable for months

Q fever                        low                  15-40 d            1-10 organisms            stable for months

Mycoplasma                low                  months                        10-100 organisms        moderately stable

T-2 Mycotoxins           moderate         1 d                   unknown                     very stable

Type B Enterotoxin    moderate         <1 d                 0.03 mcg                     moderately stable

Equine encephalitis     low                  2-6 d                10-100 organisms        relatively unstable

Many of the most lethal biological agents, such as the hemorrhagic fever viruses, are quite unstable in the environment due to their susceptibility to sunlight and extreme temperatures and would not be effective if deployed in an aerosol at long range, for example, by aircraft sprayers. Most viruses that would be useful as bioterror agent quickly cause unique signs and symptoms that would allow isolation of the victims and thus prevent further spread of the disease.  Many of the bacterial or viral incapacitating agents, however, slowly produce illnesses that would not be noticeable until some time later, and during this period they could be slowly and unknowingly spread to others.  Official denial helps this process and allows further penetration into the population.  For example, the widespread official denial of biological exposures during the Gulf War, I believe, helped spread chronic infections, such as Mycoplasma fermentans, that we and others after us found in a rather large subset (~40%) of Gulf War Illness patients.  The continuing denial by the medical organizations that would be expected to respond to such outbreaks is not comforting, because these are the same organizations that would be responsible for responding to a bioterror attack.  Thus if an attack is obvious and results in immediate fatalities, we could expect an all out response.  On the other hand, if an attack is not immediately obvious, such as would be expected if incapacitating agents were used, we might not expect an official response at all, even in the face of continuing casualties and illnesses in the population, and we might expect official denials instead in order to reassure a panicky public.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Biologic Agents

Many agents useful for a bioterror attack, even the lethal agents, produce nonspecific clinical signs and symptoms, so it is important to be aware of these if many casualties occur within a short period of time in one location.  Public health officials are being trained to spot these ‘clusters’ of illness and take appropriate action.  Unfortunately, in an era of managed health care, few hospitals and clinics probably have bioterrorism emergency plans in place.  There has been some national planning for bioterror attacks, and regional emergency supplies and personnel have been placed at the disposal of public health officials.  This plan can be relatively effective for the lethal agents listed in Table 1, but they probably won’t be effective if incapacitating agents are used.  The gradual appearance of casualties with chronic signs and symptoms would probably not be recognized by public health officials.

When detected early, most of the biological agents listed in Table 1, even some of the most lethal agents, can be effectively treated with antibiotics or antivirals.  However, an attack may go unnoticed for some time, and it might take some fatalities before public health officials notice that an attack may have occurred.  There is a strategic national stockpile of antibiotics and antivirals tailored for bioterror attacks, and it can be deployed anywhere in the United States within 12 hours of a documented attack.  Thus it is probably not necessary to stock antibiotics and antivirals, some of which can be quite expensive, in anticipation of an attack.  However, having on hand modest amounts of certain antibiotics that can be taken as soon as certain signs and symptoms occur could save your life.  If a terrorist group has the latest information and advanced expertise to produce resistant variants of biological agents, they could produce bacteria and viruses that can withstand the standard antibiotics and antivirals used for treatment.  Although this scenario is considered unlikely, it could pose some potential problems for treatment of attack victims.  For most agents there are alternative drugs that can be used.  Although some of these are not as effective as the first line treatments, they should be adequate for most patients.  In addition, there are steps that can be taken to increase that chance of survival of a biological attack.  These will be discussed below.

The Signs and Symptoms of Some Biological Agents

Most bioterror agents do not cause unique clinical signs and symptoms that are immediately recognizable in exposed individuals.  This would defeat the purpose of a bioterror attack if the means were immediately known.  Also, if the bioterror agent is quite obvious, then preventive treatment can begin immediately in people who were in close proximity but do not yet show any clinical symptoms.  The most common form of agent that could be used for a bioterror attack are bacteria.  Since bacteria are susceptible to antibiotics, especially in the early phase of the infection, this is an appropriate approach to counter a bioterror attack.  However, not all of the agents that could be deployed are bacterial.  Some examples of the most likely agents that might be used in a bioterror attack are listed in Table 1 and below:

Anthrax.  The most dangerous biological agent is probably the spore form of Bacillus anthracis.  Although the inhalation of anthrax spores is uniformly and rapidly fatal, anthrax infection can be successfully treated in its early stages with antibiotics like doxycycline or ciprofloxacin.  Victims of an inhalation anthrax attack will present initially with a flu-like illness with malaise, dry cough and mild fever.  This phase of the disease usually takes a few days, followed by severe respiratory distress.  Anthrax can be treated, but only before it enters the severe respiratory distress phase.  Most patients in the severe systemic phase will die with or without antibiotic treatments and usually before a laboratory diagnosis can confirm the presence of the bacterium in blood and tissues.  There is a vaccine available, but there are many problems with this vaccine, as we have documented with the military’s anthrax vaccine program (see more information on this vaccine under Gulf War Illnesses section of our website, www.immed.org).  We do not consider this vaccine safe for civilian use, and it would have to be administered in several doses over a period of 18 months to 2 years before an attack.  On the other hand, chemoprophylactic use of antibiotics has been shown to be effective in preventing the illness in 80-90% of monkeys given anthrax spores by inhalation.  If a terrorist group uses a form of anthrax that is resistant to the commonly used antibiotics, then others are available but time may prevent their effective use.  Persons that come into direct contact with anthrax spores should wash thoroughly with soap and water and store their clothing in a sealed plastic bag for biohazard disposal.  If anthrax spores enter the skin, cutaneous anthrax infection can occur, resulting in a black scab over the contaminated area.  At this point the infection remains treatable with antibiotics, but if left untreated approximately 20% of cases result in death.  Persons with cutaneous anthrax can also have headaches, muscle aches, fever, nausea and vomiting, indicating a systemic form of the infection.  Ingestion of contaminated meat can also result in infection (gastrointestinal anthrax).  If left untreated, this form can result in 25-60% fatalities.  Gastrointestinal anthrax can produce intestinal bleeding and similar signs and symptoms to systemic forms of the disease.  Person-to-person transmission of Bacillus anthracis is poor, and this type of infection is not considered contagious.

Hemorrhagic fever viruses.  Viral hemorrhagic fevers caused by Ebola, Marburg, Lassa or Bolivian Hemorrhagic Virus are rapidly progressing diseases that show extremely high mortality rates.  Many of these infections are caused naturally by contact with contaminated food, but they can also occur by contact with urine, feces or saliva.  The viruses are fairly fragile, and dispersing them as an aerosol would not be expected to maintain their viability for long periods of time.  Patients usually present with high fever, muscle aches and pain, hypotension and prostration.  In severe cases, patients have signs of disseminated vascular coagulation with signs of mucous membrane hemorrhage and shock.  At this stage the disease is almost always fatal.  For some hemorrhagic fever viruses the antiviral ribavirin offers some benefit.  Patients require immediate fluid, plasma or blood support.  Although these viruses are airborne, person-to-person transmission can be for the most part prevented by wearing gowns, gloves and marks.  Fortunately, these viruses do not persist in the environment for long periods, and most outbreaks in Africa have been limited by immediately isolating patients.

Plague.  Plague is caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis, which is usually spread from rodents to man through the bites of infected fleas or other insects.  In a bioterror attack the bacterium could be spread by inhalation of droplets containing Y. pestis or terrorists could simply disseminate infected fleas or other biting insects.  If left untreated, inhalation of Y. pestis is nearly always fatal within 2-3 days.  Patients usually suffer severe pneumonia with malaise, high fever, cough, spitting up blood and labored breathing.  Eventually patients go into septic shock and die because of respiratory failure and circulatory collapse.  Respiratory plague is very contagious, and strict isolation is necessary.  Early treatment with antibiotics, such as doxycycline, ciprofloxacin or other antibiotics, at the first appearance of signs and symptoms is crucial for survival.  There is a vaccine available, but immunization requires several vaccinations and boosters.

Botulism.  Botulism is caused by toxins released from the bacillus bacterium Clostridium botulinum. This can occur naturally by ingestion of infected foods, but a terrorist attack may utilize an aerosol of the bacterium or the purified toxins.  The botulism toxins are neurotoxins and cause characteristic neurological signs and symptoms within 1-5 days, such as dry mouth, double vision, excessive pupil dilatation, local paralysis, and difficulty in swallowing.  The neurotoxins usually do not cause a fever, and patients are alert and oriented.  Most patients die of respiratory failure, so respiratory support is essential and may have to be continued for several weeks to months.  The toxin can be removed from skin by washing with soap and water.  Clothes must be placed in a sealed plastic bag for biohazard disposal.  If the toxin is used, there is no danger of transmission from infected patients.  Although an antitoxin is available, it is only effective in preventing further progression; it cannot reverse neurological damage that has occurred.

Smallpox.  Smallpox is caused by the naturally occurring Variola Virus.  After exposure, the incubation period for smallpox is approximately 7-17 days, average 12 days, during which nonspecific signs and symptoms, such as fever, malaise and aches occur within a few days.  Characteristic rashes develop, starting as papules that progress to vesicles and then pustules that can form scabs in 1-2 weeks.  At this stage the disease can be mistaken for chicken pox, and it can be spread to others, so quarantine is important for anyone who has direct contact with a patient.  About 40% of unvaccinated people will die of smallpox but most people in the U.S. have received some earlier form of smallpox vaccine which should give some protection.  The antiviral cidofovir has been used to treat smallpox infections.  Effective vaccines are available but were produced many years ago.  New vaccines are under development and should be ready within the next year or so.

Brucellosis.  Brucellosis is caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella.  Historically brocellosis was caused by contact with infected livestock or after ingestion of infected milk.  Aerosols of Brucella are considered very effective at infection.  The disease develops slowly over several months as a flu-like infection with nonspecific signs and symptoms, including intermittent fever, chills, night sweats, malaise, muscle pain and soreness, cough and eventually joint pain and soreness, gastrointestinal complaints, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and constipation.  It might be diagnosed as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or Fibromyalgia Syndrome, but it is rarely fatal.  Diagnostic tests are available (see www.immed.org).  The suggested treatment is long-term antibiotics, such as doxycycline or rifampin, and immune support.

Mycoplasmas. Pathogenic mycoplasmal infections are caused by several species of mycoplasmas, including M. fermentans, among others.  These airborne and insect-borne bacterial infections are rarely fatal, but they can cause severe chronic infections that may result in patients being diagnosed with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia Syndrome or Rheumatoid Arthritis.  As with brucellosis, the chronic signs and symptoms are many and varied from patient to patient, and testing is available (see www.immed.org).  The suggested treatment is long-term antibiotics, such as doxycycline, ciprofloxacin or azithromycin, plus immune support.  There is no known vaccine for mycoplasmas, but individual vaccines have been produced from patient’s white blood cells.

Q Fever. Q Fever is caused by the bacterium Coxiella burnetii.  This can occur naturally from contact with goats, cheep and cattle.  The disease develops slowly over a month or more, with fevers, malaise, headache, muscle pain and soreness and other signs and symptoms.  About one-half of patients will have a pneumonia with cough and chest pain.  In some patients the disease can progress to hepatitis.  Treatment includes antibiotics and immune support.

Tularemia.  Tularemia or rabbit fever is usually caused by contact with infected animals that carry the bacteria Francisella tularensis.  It can also be caused by ingestion of contaminated food or water.  When aerosols are used as the infective route, the disease that evolves has slightly different signs and symptoms.  After an incubation period of 2-10 days, patients present with fever, chills, headache, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and muscle aches and pains.  Many patients will have a pneumonia with coughing.  Airborne (person-to-person) transmission can occur but is considered rare.  The treatment is a 2-3 week course of antibiotics plus immune support.

Bioterror Attack Preventive and Treatment Procedures

Antibiotics. Since there has been a run on supplies of antibiotics in the United States, is this an effective method to counter a bioterror attack?  This would be effective only if there was actual exposure, and the biological agent was bacterial and susceptible to the antibiotic chosen for chemoprophylactic use.  In addition, long-term use of antibiotics can have their own problems.  Some people cannot take ciprofloxacin because of allergic reactions (hypersensitivity or anaphylactic reactions). For example, ciprofloxacin therapy may result in drug crystals in the urine in rare cases, and patients should be well hydrated to prevent concentration of urine. Adverse antibiotic responses resulted in discontinuing ciprofloxacin in ~3.5% of patients, and such reactions included nausea (5%), diarrhea (2%), vomiting (2%) abdominal pain (1.7%), headache (1.2%) and rash (1.1%).  In rare cases cirprofloxacin may cause cardiovascular problems (<1%) and central nervous system (dizziness, insomnia, tremor, confusion, convulsions) and other reactions (<1%).  Pregnant women and children should not use this drug due to reduction in bone and cartilage development.  Although some practitioners have suggested that lower doses could be used for children, this antibiotic has not been approved for pediatric use.  Doxycycline has lower adverse responses and is just as effective against almost all anthrax strains.  However, in a few patients doxycycline causes gastrointestinal irritation, anorexia, vomiting, nausea, diarrhea, rashes, mouth dryness, hoarseness and in rare cases hypersensitivity reactions, hemolytic anemia, skin hyper-sensitivity and reduced white blood cell counts.  Doxycycline can be used at low dose in children aged 7 and above, mostly because of the chance of tooth discoloration in younger children.  Azithromycin is the antibiotic of choice for pediatric cases, but its cost generally prevents widespread use.  Adverse antibiotic responses were mild to moderate in clinical trials and included diarrhea (5%), nausea (3%), abdominal pain (3%).  In rare cases (<1%) azithromycin may cause cardiovascular problems (palpitations, tachycardia, chest pain) and central nervous system (dizziness, headache, vertigo), allergic (rash, photosensitivity, angioderma), fatigue and other reactions (<1%).  In pediatric patients >80% of the adverse responses were gastrointestinal.  In children, doses above the suggested 10 mg/kg/day have been shown to produce hearing loss in some patients.  Penicillin has been recommended for some types of bioterror agents, such as anthrax.  For example, amoxicillin, a semi-synthetic type of ampicillin, can cause fatal anaphylactic responses in patients allergic to penicillin, gastrointestinal problems (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and colitis) in some patients, and rarely anemia and changes in white blood cell count.  These are usually reversible on discontinuation of therapy.  As a relative safe preventive alternative, especially in the absence of a confirmed exposure, immune enhancers have been recommended (see below).

Antivirals.  Use of antivirals against viral agents should only be done under the direct care of a physician, and their use is only recommended after a confirmed infection.  They are not recommended for chemoprophylactic use due to a relatively high rate of complications and adverse reactions compared to the commonly used antibiotics listed above.  Some antivirals have to be given intravenously, and this can only occur in a supervised clinical setting.  Cost and availability are factors that severely limit their use, and almost all cannot be used in pregnant women and some cannot be used for children.  Certain nutraceutical treatments can be used instead or concurrently, such as Genistein (in soy/red clover) to inhibit viral kinase, rosemary/lemon balm to reduce complement activation, selenite (see below) to inhibit viral replication, barley grass and lauric acid to inhibit lipid metabolism of viruses and Phyllanthus amarus/niruri to inhibit viral reverse transcriptase.  The efficacy of these supplements in preventing infection by bioterror viral agents is not known.

Vaccines.  Specific vaccines can potentially protect against bacterial and viral bioterror agents.  Most of these vaccines would have to be administered over a relatively long time period to be effective.  For example, the current anthrax vaccine must be administered in multiple doses over an 18-month period to be effective, and it is not even known conclusively that the vaccine is effective against inhalation anthrax.  This vaccine is not recommended for civilian use due to the relatively high rate of adverse reactions, including fatalities and autoimmune diseases that have resulted from its use.  Other vaccines, such as the smallpox virus vaccine, have been in general civilian use for some time and are relatively safe.  New generations of these vaccines are under development, but they will not be available for some time, possibly years.

Passive Immunization. Passive immunization by administration of immune sera containing antibodies against specific bioterror agents is a costly alternative that can only be used after a confirmed exposure.  Newer developments include passive immune sera or pure antibodies that can target toxin molecules themselves instead of the microorganisms.  For example, antibodies against the anthrax lethal and bloat factors (the lethal toxins) or their protective factor (a transport factor needed to transport the lethal toxins into cells) can potentially stop a fatal form of systemic anthrax.  Unfortunately, these approaches are for the most part experimental and are not widely available.

Immune Enhancement and Nutrition.  Immune enhancement and nutritional approaches are not expected to be full-proof preventive measures that will protect against bioterror agents.  However, a healthy immune system is the first line of defense against microorganisms and may determine the severity of illness caused by infections.  Proper nutrition is essential for a healthy immune system.  Unfortunately, most people do not have good nutritional habits, and they would be prudent to supplement their diets with certain vitamins (especially B-complex, C, E, CoQ-10) and minerals, such as zinc, magnesium, chromium and selenium. Also, patients undergoing treatment with antibiotics and other substances risk destruction of normal gut flora that provide important digestive enzymes for processing food in the gut.  Antibiotic use that depletes normal gut bacteria and can result in over-growth of less desirable bacteria.  To supplement bacteria in the gastrointestinal system live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus in capsules or powder are strongly recommended. A number of natural remedies, such as ginseng root, herbal teas, lemon/olive drink, olive leaf extract with antioxidants fresh or deorderized garlic and oregano oil (in enteric coated capsules), among others, have been shown to be useful for immune support, especially during or after antibiotic therapy.  Some additional remedies are: olive leaf extract, lactoferrin and other natural plant products or herbal mixtures.  Other important examples of immune support are immune modulators, such as bioactive whey protein, transfer factors and other colostrum-derived products and plant glucans.  Good immune boosters have been isolated from mushroom extracts and are widely available from a number of manufacturers. These products have been used to maintain or boost immune systems to prevent infections.

What to do if you Suspect a Bioterror Attack

The most important point to remember if you suspect that you may have been exposed to a bioterror attack is to seek immediate medial attention by going to the Emergency Room at a hospital.  Most hospitals have personnel that have been trained to respond to a bioterror attack, and they know what to do to reduce your risk of dying or becoming permanently incapacitated.  In contrast to your personal physician, most hospital emergency personnel have received some type of training on how to respond to biological emergencies.  Take with you a list of where you have been for the previous several days, who you have come into close contact with, your signs and symptoms and what you think might be the source for your medical problem.  Also include any previous medical problems, medications that you are currently on and anything else that would help hospital personnel deal quickly and effectively with your problem.  Finally, in the extremely unlikely event that you or a member of your family becomes exposed to a potential bioterror or biological agent, it is important to carefully watch the other members of your family for the appearance of similar signs and symptoms.  Speed is of utmost importance in counteracting the agents listed above.  It is better to be ridiculed for acting unnecessarily than to not act at all if you feel that you or someone close to you may have been exposed to a biological agent.

For additional information contact:

Prof. Garth Nicolson

President & Chief Scientific Officer

The Institute for Molecular Medicine

P.O. Box 9355, S. Laguna Beach, CA 92653

phone: 949-715-5978

fax:714-596-3971

Email: gnicolson@immed.org

Publications and Reports

1. Potential biological weapons threats, by M. G. Kortepeter and G. W. Parker. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 1999; 5:523-527.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/kortepeter.htm

2. Bioterrorism Resources, Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epedimiology, http://www.apic.org/bioterror/

3. Biological and Chemical Terrorism: Strategic Plan for Preparedness and Response, by A. S. Khan et al., Morbidity Mortality Weekly Rep. 2000; 14:1-14.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr4904a1.htm

4. Defense Against Toxic Weapons, by D. R. Franz, U. S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, Institute of Infectious Diseases, Fort Detrick, MD.

http://www.nbc-med.org/

5. NATO Handbook on the Medical Aspects of NBC Defensive Operations, U.S. Army Field Manual 8-9, U.S. Navy Publication 5059, U.S. Air Force Joint Manual 44-151, 1996.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctrine/dod/fm8-9/toc.htm

6. Anthrax as a Biological Weapon,

http://www.jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v281n18/ffull/jst80027

7. Plague as a Biological Weapon,

http://www.jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v283n17/rfull/jst90013

8. Smallpox as a Biological Weapon,

http://www.jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v281n22/rfull/jst90000

9. Botulinum Toxin as a Biological Weapon,

http://www.jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v285n8/rfull/jst00017

10. Mycoplasmal infections in fatigue illnesses: Chronic Fatigue and Fibromyalgia Syndromes, Gulf War Illness and Rheumatoid Arthritis, by G.L. Nicolson et al. J. Chronic Fatigue Syndr. 2000; 6(3/4):23-39.

http://www.immed.org/publications/infectious_disease/JCFS99108t.html

11. Vaccines in Civilian Defense Against Bioterrorism, by P.K. Russell, Emerg. Infect. Dis. 1999; 5:531-533.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/Russell.htm

12. Anthrax Vaccine: Controversy Over Safety and Efficacy, by G.L. Nicolson, M. Nass and N.L. Nicolson. Antimicrob. Infect. Dis. Newsl. 2000; 18:1-6.

http://www.immed.org/publications/gulf_war_illness/anthrax3-18-00.html

13. An Assessment of the Safety of the Anthrax Vaccine, by H.C. Sox, Jr., et al. Institute of Medicine, March 30, 2000.

http://www.nap.edu/html/anthrax_vaccine/

14. Dietary considerations for patients with chronic illnesses and multiple chronic infections. A brief outline of eighteen dietary steps to better health, by G.L. Nicolson and R. Ngwenya. Townsend Lett. Doctors Patients 2001; 219:62-65.

http://www.immed.org/reports/treatment_considerations/TownsendDietConsid.-01.8.6.html

Journal of Degenerative Diseases 2008; 9(2): 50-53.

Garth L. Nicolson, Ph.D. and Nancy L. Nicolson, Ph.D.

The Institute for Molecular Medicine, Huntington Beach, California 92647

Hypothesis: The emergence of new diseases and the increase in incidence rates of those with previously described signs and symptoms from the 1970s onward are due to our increasingly toxic environment, the emergence of previously isolated infections and the purposeful development and testing of new Biological Weapons of Mass Destruction agents.

Introduction

Over the last 70 years a tremendous worldwide effort has been undertaken to develop new Biological Weapons of Mass Destruction (BWMD) agents.  Requirements for these new agents are that they must be colorless, by-and-large odorless microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, fungi) or toxins derived from these microorganisms that can be spread in air as aerosols or in food or drink or by biting insects to infect as many people as possible.¹ They must be easy to conceal, and thus difficult to detect before an attack.  They must also be difficult to detect when released, so a biowarfare or bioterrorist attack would be difficult to ascertain, especially due to the usually nondescript initial signs and symptoms expected in casualties from an attack.  Another advantage is that they allow the perpetrators easy avoidance or escape while eventually causing panic and chaos within a civilian or military population while overwhelming emergency medical departments at local hospitals and clinics or military medical facilities.

A misconception about BWMD agents is that they would have to cause large numbers of immediate deaths to be effective.  Most BWMD agents do not cause widespread immediate deaths, or even large numbers of deaths within days of exposure, and most exposed patients might not even have a life-threatening disease in order to cause panic and terror.  The main function of BWMD is to cause disruption and chaos, so BWMD agents don’t have to cause a fatal disease to be effective.  In fact, many biological warfare agents are categorized as ‘incapacitating agents’ that are not intended to produce fatal disease.  They are more effective if they incapacitate and produce strain on a health care system and economic infrastructure by having many thousands of sick patients inundate treatment facilities that contain only limited quantities of drugs and only a few isolation wards.

It is much easier to spread a BWMD incapacitating agent from person to person, because it would not cause enough alarm to require quarantining of exposed persons, thus causing a failure to limit additional exposures.  BWMD incapacitating agents often have relatively long incubation times, allowing their widespread penetration into a population before they are ever diagnosed or detected by laboratory tests.  Thus exposed individuals may bring the agent back ‘home’ to an unsuspecting family.  This may have happened to veterans who returned from the first Gulf War only to slowly spread their chronic illnesses to spouses and children.²

Biological Agents Used for BWMD

There are several biological agents that could be useful as BWMD.  First, there are lethal agents, such as the Ebola, Lassa and other viruses that cause viral hemorrhagic fever, inhalation anthrax caused by Bacillus anthracis, small pox virus, pneumonic plague caused by Yersinia pestis or purified protein toxins, such as the Ricinus communis toxin ricin or Clostridium botulinum toxin (Table 1).  In addition, there are incapacitating agents, such as brucellosis caused by Brucella species, Q fever caused by Coxiella burnetii, tularemia caused by Francisella tularensis, mycoplasmal infections caused by Mycoplasma fermentans and mold toxins, such as the T2 mycotoxin.  As mentioned above, the incapacitating agents for the most part cause chronic illnesses that are not usually fatal.  However, these illnesses can cause tremendous health problems in infected patients, and some are contagious and the disease could spread.

Table 1.  Some Common Biological Warfare Agents Useful as BWMD

Disease                        Lethality          Incubation                   Effective           Environmental

or agent                       (death)             period                          dose                 stability

_______Lethal Agents________________________________________________________

Anthrax                       high                 1-6 d                8,000-50,000 spores    very stable for years

Plague                         high                 1-6 d                100-500 organisms      stable for 1 year

Smallpox                     high                 7-17 d              10-100 organisms        very stable

Ebola virus                  high                 2-6 d                10-100 organisms        unstable

Botulism                      high                 1-5 d                0.001 mcg/Kg weight relatively stable

Ricin                            high                 1-2 d                3-5 mcg/Kg weight     stable

Cholera                        high                 1-3 d                10-500 organisms        unstable

_______Incapacitating Agents__________________________________________________

Brucellosis                   low                  months                        10-100 organisms        very stable

Tularemia                    low                  2-15 d              10-50 organisms          stable for months

Q fever                        low                  15-40 d            1-10 organisms            stable for months

Mycoplasma                low                  months                        10-100 organisms        moderately stable

T-2 Mycotoxins           moderate         1 d                   unknown                     very stable

Type B Enterotoxin    moderate         <1 d                 0.03 mcg                     moderately stable

Equine encephalitis     low                  2-6 d                10-100 organisms        relatively unstable

Many of the most lethal BWMD, such as the hemorrhagic fever viruses, are quite unstable in the environment due to their susceptibility to sunlight and temperature and would not be effective if deployed in an aerosol at long range by aircraft or missile.  However, others, such as anthrax spores, can easily survive using this method of dispersal.  Anthrax spores have been found to survive for over 50 years in the environment, even under extreme conditions.  Although anthrax spores are considered one of the most likely biological agents that might be deployed, once the illness occurs it cannot be commonly spread to others, unlike many of the incapacitating agents.  Other highly lethal infections, such as from hemorrhagic fever viruses, show unique signs and symptoms that would allow isolation of the victims and thus prevent further spread of the disease.  Many of the bacterial or viral incapacitating agents, however, could slowly produce illnesses that would not be noticeable until some time later, and during this period they could be slowly spread to others.

Development of New BWMD Agents

Over the years new BWMD agents have been developed, but their testing has remained difficult due to the fact that most nations involved in BWMD development are signatory to the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Biological Weapons.  For example, the USA ratified this international treaty in 1975.  This treaty bans the development and testing of all BWMD agents.  However, signatory nations have circumvented this ban by conducting secret experiments under the guise of biodefense research, which is permitted under the treaty, or by flagrant disregard of the terms of the treaty.

The authors’ inadvertent involvement in discovering the unethical program began when military casualties returned home from Gulf War I with undiagnosed chronic illnesses that could not easily be assigned to the normal military diagnosis categories.  Eventually this became known as Gulf War Syndrome or Gulf War Illness.² Over the years tremendous effort has been expended to first deny the existence of Gulf War Illness, and then when this proved difficult, to deny that it could be caused by an infectious agent.³ Most military physicians were content to believe that Gulf War Illness was a psychological problem, not one caused by exposure to biological, radiological or chemical events.^2,3

One of the interesting stories that occurred during the discovery of an unusual pathogen in approximately 40% of Gulf War Illness patients was that this same agent was present in the Texas prison system in the mid-1970s to late-1980s, well before the Gulf War in 1991.⁴ This pathogen, Mycoplasma fermentans, is a primitive cell wall-deficient bacteria that was first patented by a U.S. Army pathologist and was thought to be involved in a number of chronic diseases.⁵ In fact, the discovery and most of the research on M. fermentans was conducted by U.S. Army laboratories.  For example, M. fermentans was found by Lo and his collaborators to cause a lethal infection in non-AIDS-infected military personnel.⁶

Until after the first Gulf War the U.S. Department of Defense’s own medical school (Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences at the Bethesda National Naval Medical Center) taught the following about M. fermentans infections.⁷

Mycoplasma fermentans⁷

The most serious presentation of M. fermentans infection is that of a fulminating systemic disease that begins as a flu-like illness.  Patients rapidly deteriorate developing severe complications, including adult respiratory distress syndrome, disseminated intravascular coagulation, and/or multiple organ failure.

The organs of patients with fulminant M. fermentans infections exhibit extensive necrosis.  Necrosis is most pronounced in lung, liver, spleen, lymph nodes, adrenal glands, heart and brain.  M. fermentans is identified in areas of necrosis, particularly in the advancing margin of necrosis, by the immunohisto-chemistry using specific anti-M. fermentans and M. fermentans incognitus antibiody and/or by in situ hybridization assays using cloned incognitus strain DNA.  Mycoplasma-like particles are found intracellularly and extracellularly by electron microscopy.

Microorganisms such as M. fermentans have also produced progressive chronic illnesses in a variety of animal species.  For example, Lo et al.⁸ found that injection of M. fermentans into nonhuman primates resulted in development of a fulminate, fatal illness.  These animals displayed many chronic signs and symptoms but did not mount an antibody response until they were near death.⁸ In humans, infections like M. fermentans have been associated with increased severity of signs and symptoms in fatiguing illnesses,⁹ neurodegenerative diseases,¹⁰ neurobehavioral diseases,¹¹ autoimmune diseases,¹² complex infections like Lyme Disease¹³ and other diseases.^10,14

Our hypothesis is that this process did not occur randomly.  Infections like M. fermentans were not acknowledged in the medical literature before the late 1980s. In addition, new emerging illnesses like the fatiguing illnesses (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia Syndrome, Gulf War Illnesses, etc.) were relatively unknown before the 1980s, or were found in only a few cases reported by the 1990s.  Some diseases (for example, neurodegenerative, neurobehavioral and autoimmune diseases) showed striking increases in incidence during this same 1980s period.¹⁰ All of these diseases have one thing in common—the high incidence of chronic infections that were rarely found previously.¹⁰ Prominent among these chronic infections were infections caused by Mycoplasma species and similar bacteria.¹⁰

‘Weaponization’ of New BWMD Agents

Once new biological agents have been isolated and tested in animals and humans, they have to be ‘weaponized’ before they are considered useful as BWMD.  This process must take into account various properties that are necessary for enhanced survival, dissemination and pathogenic properties of the microorganism.

Before the advent of genetic engineering, microorganisms were ‘weaponized’ mainly by a slow process of selection to obtain variants that possessed the properties necessary for a BWMD agent.  For example, the candidate microorganism must be resistant to heat, sunlight and dryness; thus variants were selected for enhanced resistance to these environmental conditions.  They also must have strong pathogenic properties and cause sickness by the entry of small numbers of microbes into the body.  This could be accomplished by passing the candidate microorganism through multiple animals or even humans to select variants with increased pathogenic properties.

By the 1980s the use of genetic engineering allowed researchers to bypass lengthy selection regimens by inserting particular genes into candidate microorganisms to ‘improve’ their BWMD properties (Table 2).

Table 2.  Some Genes Useful for ‘Weaponizing’ Candidate BWMD Agents

‘Weaponsization’ Property      Gene to be Inserted                 Resulting Characteristic

Heat resistance                        Thermal resistance genes         Survives explosions or fires

Dry resistance                         Spore-forming genes               Survives desert or dry conditions

Cellular entry                          Receptor gene                         Increased cell entry

Cellular death                          Apoptosis or toxin genes        Increased cell and tissue death

Tissue targeting                       Tissue receptor gene                Targets particular tissues/organs

Immune resistance                  Immune suppression genes     Immune suppression

Mass production                     Growth genes                          Grows easily to high density in vitro

For example, we hypothesize that ‘weaponization’ of M. fermentans probably occurred by the insertion of several genes that enabled the micoorganism to better survive and possess increased pathogenic properties.  Evidence for this genetic process can be found in the genetic signature of M. fermentans seen in military patients and those civilians used for experimental studies on the infectious process.

A contentious finding of ours identified a gene from the HIV-1 virus in some military patients infected with M. fermentans. The particular gene was the env gene, which encodes gp120, part of the viral spikes that allow the HIV-1 virus to bind to specific receptors on cells and allow the virus to enter cells.¹⁵ This is shown in Figures 1 and 2.  We hypothesize that insertion of the env gene increased the pathogenic properties of M. fermentans by allowing it to more easily enter cells as well as target cells of the immune system, just like the HIV-1 virus.¹⁶

Interestingly, when we examined some of the guards who worked in Texas prisons implicated in the testing of M. fermentans as a new BWMD agent (see next section), we found evidence of various HIV-1 genes in different patients (env, pol and rev) not just the one gene (env) found in military patients.  This ‘exposure’ to various gene-containing M. fermentans strains preceded the first Gulf War, so it implicated the Texas prisons in the testing of various candidate gene-modified M. fermentans mutants for their properties, including their pathogenecity.

Figure 1. The genomic and physical structures of the HIV-1 virus

Figure 2. A hypothesis on how the HIV-1 env gene increases the entry rate and pathogenic properties of Mycoplasma fermentans.

Testing of ‘Weaponized’ BWMD Agents

Once new candidate BWMD mutant microorganisms have been developed, there is natural pressure to test the new mutants, along with their engineered genomes, to see if their resulting properties make them more effective as BWMD agents.   Such testing can be conducted in animals, but for some purposes only humans are useful as test subjects.  Thus there is pressure to conduct clinical trials using human subjects.  Two of the most useful groups of possible subjects for such clinical trials are military personnel and prisoners.¹⁸

In the case of M. fermentans we believe that clinical testing was performed on both military and prison personnel (inmates).  Evidence for this includes the presence of M. fermentans in the blood of Gulf War Illness patients who received multiple military vaccines during deployment and in some cases their immediate family members (but only after the veterans returned to the home)¹⁷ as well as in prison guards who worked in selected prisons in Texas.⁴ In the case of veterans of the first Gulf War, there was a strong association of Gulf War Illness symptoms to the military vaccines received during deployment.¹⁹

In the case of prisoners as experimental subjects, Texas has a long history of using prisoners for clinical trials.^{18, 20} According to the minutes of the Texas Department of Corrections Board, selected prisons in East Texas were used for experiments that were conducted using various Mycoplasma species to determine pathogenicity and countermeasures against infection.²¹ This likely resulted in the spread of mycoplasmal illnesses from prisoners to guards and other prison employees and then to their immediate family members in the community.

In the 1980s in the city of Huntsville, Texas most of the employment was at the local state prisons.  In this small East Texas town there was a dramatic increase in neurodegenerative, autoimmune and fatiguing illnesses that were linked to employment at local prisons.  Although unproven, it is likely that the increases in chronic illnesses in towns like Huntsville were indirectly linked to the clinical trials being conducted at local prisons.²² It is very likely that other states also provided experimental subjects from their prisons and military bases for the testing of new or existing BWMD agents, and this may have contributed to the overall increases in the incidence of chronic illnesses seen in various regions around the nation.

References

1. Kortepeter MG, Parker GW. Potential biological weapons threats. Emerg Infect Dis 1999; 5:523-527.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/kortepeter

2. Nicolson GL, Berns P, Nasralla M, Haier J, Nicolson NL, Nass M. Gulf War Illnesses: chemical, radiological and biological exposures resulting in chronic fatiguing illnesses can be identified and treated. J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 2003; 11(1):135-154.

http://www.immed.org/illness/gulfwar_illness_research.html

3. Nicolson GL. Testimony to the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee on Health, United States House of Representatives, Washington DC, January 24, 2002.

http://www.immed.org/illness/gulfwar_illness_research.html

4. Nicolson GL, Nicolson NL. Project Day Lily, Xlibris Publishing, ISBN: 1-4134-8519-7, 2005.

http://www.projectdaylily.com/

5. Lo S-C. Pathogenic mycoplasma. U.S. Patent 5,242,820.  Issued September 7, 1993.

6. Lo S-C, Dawson MS, Newton PB et al. Association of the virus-like infectious agent originally reported in patients with AIDS with acute fatal disease in previously healthy non-AIDS patients.  Am  J  Trop  Med  Hygiene 1989; 41:364-376.

7. Pathology Syllabus VI. Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Bethesda National Naval Medical Center, 1994.

8. Lo SC, Wear DJ, Shih WK, et al. Fatal systemic infections of non-human primates by Mycoplasma fermentans (incognitus strain).  Clin Infect Dis 1993; 17(S1):283-288.

9. Nicolson GL, Gan R, Haier J.  Multiple co-infections (mycoplasma, Chlamydia, human herpesvirus-6) in blood of chronic fatigue syndrome patients: association with signs and symptoms. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand 2003; 111:557-566.

http://www.immed.org/illness/fatigue_illness_research.html

10. Nicolson, G.L. Chronic infections in neurodegenerative and neurobehavioral diseases. Lab Medicine 2008; 39(5):291-299.

11. Nicolson GL, Gan R, Nicolson NL, Haier J. Evidence for Mycoplasma, Chlamydia pneunomiae and HHV-6 Co-infections in the blood of patients with Autism Spectrum Disorders. J Neuroscience Res 2007; 85:1143-1148.

http://www.immed.org/illness/Neurodegenerative%20Diseases.html

12. Haier J, Nasralla M, Franco AR, Nicolson GL.  Detection of mycoplasmal infections in blood of patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. Rheumatol 1999; 38:504-509.

http://www.immed.org/illness/autoimmune_illness_research.html

13. Nicolson GL, Nicolson NL, Haier J. Chronic Fatigue Syndrome patients subsequently diagnosed with Lyme Disease Borrelia burgdorferi: evidence for Mycoplasma species co-infections.  J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 2008; 14(4):5-17.

14. Nicolson GL, Nasralla M, Franco AR, et al. Mycoplasmal infections in fatigue illnesses: Chronic Fatigue and Fibromyalgia Syndromes, Gulf War Illness and Rheumatoid Arthritis.  J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 2000; 6(3):23-39.

http://www.immed.org/illness/autoimmune_illness_research.html

15. Nicolson GL, Nicolson NL, Nasralla M.  Mycoplasmal infections and Chronic Fatigue Illness (Gulf War Illness) associated with deployment to Operation Desert Storm. Intern J  Med 1998; 1:80-92.

http://www.immed.org/illness/gulfwar_illness_research.html

16. Nazari R, Josi S. CCR5 as a target for HIV-1 gene therapy.  Curr Gene Ther 2008; 8:264-272.

17. Nicolson GL, Nasralla M, Nicolson NL, Haier J. High prevalence of mycoplasmal infections in symptomatic (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) family members of mycoplasma-positive Gulf War Illness patients. J Chronic Fatigue Syndr 2003; 11(2):21-36.

http://www.immed.org/illness/gulfwar_illness_research.html

18. Knight V. The use of volunteers in medical virology. Prog Med Virol 1984; 6:1-26.

19. Steele L. Prevalence and patterns of Gulf War Illness in Kansas veterans: association of symptoms with characteristics of person, place and time of military service.  Am J Epidemiol 2000; 152:992-1002.

20. Couch RB, Cate TR, Douglas RG, Jr, Gerone PJ, Knight V. Effect of route of inoculation on experimental viral disease in volunteers and evidence for airborne transmission. Bacteriol Rev 1996; 30:517-529.

21. Brown C. Mycoplasma experiments conducted in Texas prisons. J Degenerative Dis 1999; 1(1): pages

22. Medley S. Testimony to the President’s Panel on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses, Washington DC, August 14, 1995.

Question: What do most women think about more than men?  Answer: Their Hair. Don’t get upset ladies-we know it’s true.
Many people don’t know that the first woman to become a self-made millionaire was a Black woman by the name of Madam CJ Walker.  She went from working in the cotton fields in the South-to distributing hair care products through her own manufacturing firm.  For those of you who chemically straighten your hair-you can thank her for the perm.  I’ll stick with my nappy hair. Thanks.

There are many lessons we can learn from Madam CJ Walker.  The first is that if we have enough drive we can accomplish anything even under the most inauspicious circumstances.

In Madam CJ Walker’s time, Black people weren’t an “interest group”-so most Blacks had to depend on one other (mutual aid networks) like the church in order to survive.  Madam CJ Walker understood that.  Because of her entrepreneurial spirit-not only was she able to become a self-made millionaire, she was able to help lift many Black people out of poverty through EMPLOYMENT. We should always avoid class envy because if Madam CJ was poor and part of the “why me” chorus–she wouldn’t have been able to create jobs.  I want you to remember that next time a Liberal politician tries to get you angry at “rich people”.  Madam CJ Walker was also a philanthropist. She left over 2/3 of her wealth to organizations she felt worked towards the betterment of her community– like the Tuskegee Institute, and a historically black college by the name of Bethune-Cookman College.

Many Black people hated Reagan because they say he cut many “essential” social programs.  What many Blacks fail to realize is that under Reagan, the number of black-owned businesses increased from 308,000 – 424, 000 which is equivalent to a 38 percent influx (compared to the 14 percent increase in the total number of firms in the United States). Moreover, receipts by black-owned firms doubled (went from $9.6 billion to $19.8 billion at the end of his administration).  Let’s give credit where credit is due. Part of the reason why receipts for Black owned businesses doubled is because Reagan understood that too much government can stifle economic activity.   Which do you prefer, a leader who promotes dependency through legislation-or one who promotes economic autonomy? I choose the latter.

Obama’s policies may sound nice but they aren’t doing anything to stimulate the economic activity in this country.  When the rest of America is in a recession-the ripple effects on the Black community are even more potent. While I have tremendous respect for Obama, as an individual, I cannot willfully blind myself to the fact his policies are having a retardant effect on our economy…because his father was Black, like me.

Instead of waiting for the government to step in where we come short-it’s important for us to look to the people who came before us, like Madam Walker-who had conditions significantly more arduous-yet still managed to turn their obstacles into opportunities.

The entrepreneurs in the Inner City should look more like the people who fraternize their businesses.  There are many non-profit small business networks which help individuals draft business proposals.  There are also programs that help small business owners with loans and grants.  Many of these programs are geared specifically for Blacks.  Madam CJ Walker didn’t have any of those things in her day.  So, therefore, -we have no excuses.

I graduated from the police academy in 2006, and worked both as a deputy for a sheriff’s office and police officer for a municipal city. I was trained in the use of a TASER and carried one on duty. I never deployed it while on patrol, but have had a fair amount of exposure to the device and the implications surrounding it.

The TASER has been an issue of increased debate and the more this device is being implemented into mainstream society,  more negative effects regarding its use are being reported. This topic is often one filled with emotion and fear among officers. The more controversial the TASER becomes, the more there is fear of losing it as a tool. This anxiety is reasonably understandable, but that doesn’t take way from the fact there are serious issues that should be addressed surrounding this device and its use in the field. Regardless of one’s feelings on the TASER, there is one remaining consistency – people are sustaining injuries and death after its use. This of course is no different than when regular tactics used by the police not involving the TASER are implimented. After all, some people do get hurt and some die  by the police as well. The key points to remember, however, is how these people are being injured or dying.

When people are physically hurt or killed by  police in situations where a TASER was not used or present, the individuals most likely arrived at that point by behaving in a  disruptive or dangerous manner. The problem that is taking place more frequently with the TASER, is that people are being subjected to this device much too early. Before this is discussed further, one must understand the use of force continuum, what it is, and how it is applied.

Use of force continuum: The use of force continuum is a system used by law enforcement to calculate the appropriate use of force in any given situation. Generally speaking, the rule of thumb is that the suspect, not the officer, is in charge of how high the use of force continuum advances. If the suspect continues to rise in hostility, the officer must raise the force to counter the actions of the suspect. Some use of force policies may differ between departments, and from state to state in small detail, but generally speaking, most use of force continuum polices are the same. These policies are as follows:

• Officer presence
• Verbal commands
• Soft hands (control tactics/wrist locks/OC spray)
• Hard hands (strike points/impact weapons)
• Lethal force (firearm/strike points to vital areas)

For  a clear understanding of this policy, reference the use of  the following force continuum chart.

The reason the TASER has become so controversial is because it is often being used in situations where the TASER was unnecessary. If the TASER were only being used in situations where the only other option was hard techniques or lethal force, there wouldn’t be such a public outcry. In my opinion the majority of police officers show sound judgment and use good common sense,  however there appears to be an increase where people are being exposed to the TASER on very low levels  of force continuum. Many people think the TASER was designed to be a replacement to lethal force. This is false. What the TASER does  do, is allow the officer  options in which to neutralize a situation more safely and efficiently. If there is a situation where the life of the officer or another is in danger, you do not want an officer reaching for the TASER when they should be reaching for their firearm. The reason for this is because the TASER does not always deploy successfully, and this could result in the officer or a third party severely hurt or killed as a result.

The correct location for the TASER should be placed on level four under hard techniques. If an officer reaches a point where techniques such as hard strikes and impact weapons such as the baton must be utilized, this is an appropriate situation to deploy the TASER. An officer has many tools that can be used against them in a physical struggle, such as their  firearm. Many officers have been shot with their own weapon, therefore, when faced with a combative suspect, the TASER is a reasonable tool for such an application. Unfortunately, an increasing number of officers will use officer presence, verbal commands, and then TASER. This is where the true controversies set in because either it is used prematurely, or as a compliance tool - both of which is inappropriate application of the device.

A good example of misappropriation of the TASER is the “don’t tase me bro” incident that took place at a John Kerry Speech. The officers had the suspect detained and on the ground. The officer threatened use of the TASER if he kept moving (compliance). The suspect then cried out, “Don’t TASE me.” At this point the TASER had done its job. It had intimidated the suspect into submission and there was no threat. The officer used the TASER anyway. This, in my opinion, was nothing more than grand- standing for the audience. There was no need  for deployment of the TASER, even if it were only a drive stung (deployment without the cartridge).

Another example is that of a 14 year old girl. She was attempting to run from a police chief in New Mexico when he shot her from behind with the TASER. One of the barbs hit her in the head, penetrating her skull. “The girl slowed down, but became scared after Hatcher yelled at her to stop and threatened force with the taser. She started to run again. “Hatcher said he attempted to catch up to the girl by foot  but was unable to do so and believes he had no choice but to fire a Taser dart to stop her” (14 year old girl shot in head with taser. 2009). This could have been potentially fatal, and had the officer realized the potential harm the TASER was capable of, he most likely would have not deployed the TASER in the first place.

Another example of misuse is that of Kathryn Winkfein. Kathryn was a 72 year old great -grandmother who was stopped for doing 65 mph in a 45 mph zone. According to MSMBC,” Sgt. Maj. Gary Griffin of the Travis County, Texas, Constable’s Office told NBC News that Bieze acted appropriately.“He mitigated this event safely, effectively and efficiently. Nobody sustained any injury,” Griffin said. (Celizic, M., 2009).  Even if a 72 year old woman in not cooperating ,how can it ever be argued that it’s ok to TASER a woman that is 72 years old? If a male officer cannot effectively subdue women at the age of 72, they have no business being a law enforcement officer in the first place. A baton would have been out of the question, but lighting her up with 50,000 volts is acceptable? There is a serious lack of judgment and logic in this scenario. I hate to be critical of fellow officers, but criticism should  be applied where criticism is due. Other wise there is no way to learn and adapt to such situations.

There are an increasing number of deaths per year following TASER deployments, and as the years continue to go by, so do the number of injuries and deaths associated with this device. Does this mean the device should be removed from law enforcement? No.  What it does mean, is that the TASER must be respected as a serious tool that can cause harm, or even in some cases, kill. Therefore, it should be deployed tactfully in appropriate situations. Using the TASER as a compliance tool is simply bone – headed and dangerous to the general public. Police officers are there to protect the public from harm. Using a device without knowing or understanding the possible consequences can be serious, and the public should not serve as a test bed for this device. If an officer realized that this device could kill, they would most certainly be more careful to ONLY deploy it when necessary - not because a suspect is passively resistant. Passively resistant is when a suspect is  verbally defiant, or may not co-operate with an order, i.e. pulling away or shrugging as an officer grabs them, or failing to complete the officer’s verbal demands. A perfect example of a Taser deployment during a passively resistant suspect can be seen here. A woman is ordered to complete several requests by an officer. She is being argumentative, but is not assaulting the officer in anyway. He could easily have used control tactics to detain her, but instead relies on the TASER.

With the many cases of misuse, one must ask, why? The answer is pretty simple – training. TASER International is the one providing the supposed non-biased data along with training criteria to the various police departments on the proper use and safety of the TASER. For a long time TASER International took the position that their device is completely safe and could not cause cardiac arrest.  This has recently changed. In October of 2009, TASER International released a document instructing officers not to aim at the chest. This of course caused controversy. In the past, coroner reports have ruled  cause of death to be from the TASER. TASER  International responded by filing a lawsuit against the coroner’s office demanding the report be changed as to its findings. As a result, doctors spoke out against TASER, stating these were unethical strong- arm tactics of corporate intimidation. Infowars.com states the following:

“Doctors have condemned as corporate “intimidation” a court decision ordering a chief medical examiner to remove any reference to the use of a taser as an antecedent in the deaths of three men.

Ohio examiner Dr. Lisa Kohler had noted in her autopsy reports that electrical shocks from Tasers were partially to blame for the deaths of individuals in three separate confrontations with police.

Taser International, now notorious for its stern legal defense having won 68 out of 68 lawsuits, filed and won a civil suit, forcing Kohler to delete all mentions of the weapons and to term the deaths “accidental”

Jeffrey Jentzen, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners, an organization that represents the majority of medical examiners in the United States, has warned that the actions of Taser International and the court ruling have set a dangerous precedent:

“Our membership is very concerned about these cases and the reaction of Taser to these cases,” he said last night.

“Our membership is looking into the area and although Taser has developed its own opinion, there are certainly opposing opinions as to their involvement in causing sudden death in individuals.

“Our organization feels that it violates the physician’s ability to make a medical decision. Ordering a professional physician to change or alter their records is in violation of their right to practice medicine.

“Taser has sued a number of medical examiners for making informed medical opinions in an attempt, I think, to both protect their product and send a threatening message to medical examiners.

“It is dangerously close to intimidation,” he said. “They are attempting to send a message to medical examiners that if they elect to make that determination they may face a civil suit.” (Watson, S, 2008).

Now, in 2009, TASER International has flipped  their position.  According to the Arizona Republic, “The maker of Taser stun guns is advising police officers to avoid shooting suspects in the chest with the 50,000-volt weapon, saying that it could pose an extremely low risk of an “adverse cardiac event.”

The advisory, issued in an Oct. 12 training bulletin, is the first time that Taser International has suggested there is any risk of a cardiac arrest related to the discharge of its stun gun.

But Taser officials said Tuesday that the bulletin does not state that Tasers can cause cardiac arrest. They said the advisory means only that law-enforcement agencies can avoid controversy over the subject if their officers aim at areas other than the chest. (Anglen, R, 2009).

As the above states, “Taser officials said Tuesday that the bulletin does not state that Tasers can cause cardiac arrest”. This is completely false. The following is taken from the training bulletin released by TASER International, “while it may not be possible to say that an ECD could never affect the heart under any circumstances, the risk of VF is extremely rare and would be rounded to near zero” (Taser training bulletin, 2009).

In a media interview, a spokesman states, “No where did they say the Taser could cause cardiac arrest”, and here as you can see, the bulletin clearly states it can happen, even though TASER claims the chances are low. Low or not, they are still stating it can happen. The hypocrisy, however, does not stop there. The bulletin also states the following:

“Should Sudden Cardiac Arrest occur in an arrest situation involving a TASER® electronic control device (ECD) discharge to the chest area – plaintiff attorneys will likely file an excessive use of force claim against the law enforcement agency and officer and try to allege that the TASER ECD played a role in the arrest related death by causing ventricular fibrillation (VF), an arrhythmia that can be fatal without intervention. The available research does not support this” (Taser training bulletin, 2009).

TASER states in their bulletin that “the available research does not support this”. This is another complete false statement and misleading. There have been numerous studies done with TASERS, and experts have come forward warning of the possible dangers of TASER and cardiac arrest. CBC News reported in 2008, a team of doctors and scientists at the trauma center at Cook County Hospital conducted tests on pigs with the TASER device. The results were shocking – literally.

“The team of doctors and scientists at the trauma centre in Chicago’s Cook County Hospital stunned 11 pigs with Taser guns in 2006, hitting their chests with 40-second jolts of electricity, pausing for 10 to 15 seconds, then hitting them for 40 more seconds.

When the jolts ended, every animal was left with heart rhythm problems, the researchers said. Two of the animals died from cardiac arrest, one three minutes after receiving a shock” (Chicago study calls taser safety claims into question, 2008).

Police officers need to be aware of the dangers says the experts,

“Dr. Andrew Dennis, a Chicago-based trauma surgeon and police officer who worked on the study, said if Tasers can affect pigs, more research needs to be done to study how safe the stun guns are. In the meantime, police should question when, and on whom, they use the devices, he said.

“The officers need to question themselves and ask themselves, ‘Is this the appropriate situation for this device?’ “Dennis said. “They need to have the understanding that this is not a truly benign device” (Chicago study calls taser safety claims into question, 2008).

TASER International hit back with the following statement:

“Rick Smith, the CEO of Taser International and company co-founder, doesn’t think much can be concluded from the Chicago study because it focused on pigs that weigh less than 100 pounds and have a very different physiology from humans.

Smith said studies done on humans have shown Tasers don’t pose a serious health threat.

“The human studies are clearly much more relevant to policy-makers, and to people that are interested in the science of how Tasers affect people,” he said” (Chicago study calls taser safety claims into question, 2008).

Again, however, we see more hypocrisy on the side of TASER International. As CBC News correctly points out, “pig studies have been used as evidence in arguments for and against stun guns in the past. Even the Taser International website points to studies on pigs in which the outcomes suggest the stun guns aren’t a serious safety risk” ” (Chicago study calls taser safety claims into question, 2008).

Evidently, it’s ok for TASER International to promote testing with pigs when it’s in their favor, and to dismiss it when it is not. So far much of TASER’S positions on the issue have been nothing more then double talk and misinformation, this is in my opinion is very concerning. They say no research is available to support the dangers of cardiac arrest, yet we have a study they commented on and attempted to refute. They say that pig studies are not creditable,  yet they promote it when it’s in their favor with the findings. How can a police officer confidently use such a device in a real world setting when the very manufacturer continues to shift its position on what the device is,or is not capable of? The real problem is that if TASER were to admit to such an issue, millions of dollars would be at risk. There have been many lawsuits against Taser International, many of which are actually police officers who were hurt during training.  A study in 2006 found that many of the devices on the street were more powerful then TASER International claimed they were capable of.

“A study measuring electric shocks from a Taser stun gun found that it was 39 times more powerful than the manufacturer claimed, raising new questions about the weapon’s safety.
The study, published last month in the peer-reviewed Journal of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers, concluded that the shocks are powerful enough to cause fatal heart rhythms. It is one of the few scientific studies of Taser’s electric jolt in which the company did not participate.

“The findings show the energy delivered by the weapon to be considerably understated by the manufacturer,” the Journal study said. “These findings place the weapon well into the lethal category” (Study raises concern over Taser’s safety, 2006). Canada removed many Tasers from use on the street as a result of finding Tasers that were emitting too much power.

In 2007, Pamela Schrieiner, a former employee of TASER International, testified in an affidavit about her experience while working at TASER. Pamela stated in 2004 she was hired as an executive legal assistant for the executive team at TASER International. She states “I reported to Doug Klint, corporate counsel, rick Smith, CEO, and Tom Smith, the company’s president.” Pamela states she was assigned to organize a large number of volunteer exposure reports that were located in boxes scattered throughout the offices. Volunteer reports are documents filled out by police officers exposed to the effects of the TASER. Pamela states “while creating the spreadsheet, I became aware that there were hundreds, if not thousands, of injuries noted on the volunteer exposure reports”. According to Pamela, Doug Klint and Rick Smith became very upset at this. The company was under investigation by the Security and Exchange Commission, and the Department of Justice concerning the safety of TASERS. Pamela states” Mr Klint and Mr. Smith told me to remove the data from the spread sheets for most of the injuries which I had entered. They then shredded most of the reports showing injuries, bringing in dumpsters to dispose of the paper. Many of the destroyed documents contained reports of injuries to the back”.

Pamela states that in late 2004 there was a meeting held about information being leaked to the media. TASER had hired some off duty police officers to investigate the issue. Pamela states she was accused of leaking information by the officers, and even though she claimed her innocence, she was forced to resign. Pamela says since leaving TASER International, she has been threatened by people hired by TASER. She states that people she has never met would come up to her in the grocery store, and tell her “it’s not a good idea testify against TASER”. Pamela ends her testimony by stating the following:

“Rick Smith, Tom Smith, and Doug Smith are responsible for hiding and covering up information on the extent of injuries to officers during TASER trainings. I know this because I was instructed to alter the spreadsheets and saw them destroy documents. Doug Klint told me that the lawsuits against TASER would go away because there would be no documents to prove that TASER knew that injuries were happening”.

Pamela is set to testify on behalf of a case involving a Georgia State Trooper. According to RMCP watch.com, the following has taken place:

“Ms. Johnson, the lawyer representing the Georgia state trooper, filed an emergency motion for a protective order from the court regarding the expected deposition of Ms. Schreiner. The woman did not wish to testify in the Phoenix area, “due to the previous threats and harassment by members of the law enforcement community in the Phoenix area on Taser’s payroll,” the motion says.

Since then, Taser has been asking numerous “intrusive and harassing questions” about Ms. Schreiner’s finances and private medical history, according to Ms. Johnson’s motion. The company has subpoenaed her tax returns, bank account statements, phone bills and documents reflecting “your diagnosis of and treatment for cancer” for the years 2004 and 2005” (ex-taser worker alleges she was threatened, 2009).

The fact TASER International is demanding such irrelevant history about Mrs. Shriener demonstrates troubling lengths in which they will go to somehow destroy a person’s creditability. RMCP Watch.com goes on to state the following:

“The Georgia case that includes Ms. Schreiner’s allegations involves claims of a debilitating back injury sustained by David Wilson, a former Georgia State Trooper, during his training on how to use the device.

That case, launched last year, is similar to one filed by RCMP Constable Dan Husband, who was stationed in Revelstoke, B.C., when he suffered a back injury after a voluntary Taser strike, he claims. Officers are encouraged to experience a Taser shot as part of their training, the suit says. Const. Husband’s suit was filed a year ago but only made public this week in the National Post.

There have been at least 10 training-injury lawsuits filed against Taser since 2003, according to the company. They are among the more than 100 product-liability suits it has faced, according to the company’s most recent filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the U.S. stock market regulator.”

“Lawyers for Taser, who are defending against the Georgia suit, filed weighty legal arguments trying to keep a jury from hearing Ms. Schreiner’s allegations. Taser said in court she resigned after working for nine months when she was accused of providing false information during a corporate investigation and that her affidavit contradicts her earlier statements”(ex-taser worker alleges she was threatened, 2009).

These issues are very concerning considering many officers have been injured in training after being encouraged to take such a hit from the TASER. I, myself, was hit with the TASER in training and suffered a severe back strain to my upper back that required medical attention resulting in missed work. Had I known about such cases involving officers being hurt in training beforehand, I certainly would have made a different decision. The risk of injury vs. no benefit to receiving a hit in my opinion is not worth it. The fact TASER allegedly destroyed such information that should have been shared with officers, including myself, is even more concerning. I am not unique in this regard. One such example is that of a 38 year old officer in 2007. This officer volunteered to demonstrate the safety of the TASER for the British Metropolitan Police.  After being hit with the device he was rushed to the hospital with severe back fractures. Janes.com sates the following:

“A police officer in the US who volunteered to be the subject of a Taser demonstration has suffered possibly lasting damage including spine fractures after receiving a five-second discharge, according to a respected medical journal.

The 38-year-old victim was rushed by ambulance to hospital where a scan showed he suffered compression fractures in his spine caused by muscle spasms triggered by being Tasered in a training class.

The case has now entered medical literature after being written up in the eminent American College of Emergency Physicians journal which released the details

Supt Charlie Hill, staff officer to the ACPO police use of firearms working group, said the case underlined the need to move with caution until more can be discovered about the potential side effects of using Tasers”(Officer injured in taser demonstration, 2007).

A more recent case is that of Utah man, 32year old Brian Cardall. Brian had a history of mental illness. While on a road trip from Arizona with his wife, he became agitated. Brian had stripped his clothes off and began having an episode. His wife called for the police to come help detain him. When the police arrived they TASERED him, knocking Brian unconscious. He died shortly after at a nearby hospital. Brian’s wife was pregnant when he passed, leaving behind three children and a wife. Had the police been aware that the device could kill Brian, or if it was found that the mentally ill are more susceptible to the TASER, they almost certainly would have used another method (Non-lethal weapon kills utah man, 2009).

In conclusion, should the TASER be taken off the street? In this peace officer’s opinion no. It can still serve as a good tool in law enforcement as long as it is used appropriately and respectfully. People reading this article should understand I am not anti-TASER. I am however for doing what I believe is morally and ethically right by putting the safety of fellow officers in training and the safety of the general public first and foremost. In my opinion the following should take place concerning the TASER:

1. There should be a federal investigation into the legitimacy of Mrs. Schriener’s testimony and validated whether or not important evidence of the device’s safety has been withheld and destroyed.
2. There should be federal and private sector independent testing of the device. It is not ethical that the general public be used as a test bed for the TASER, while TASER International continues to change their policies and positions as people suffer the consequences after being exposed to the device.
3. The  number of officers injured during “safe” taser training must be taken seriously. This device must be respected.  It is not a toy, and officers should not be encouraged to take a hit. We don’t shoot each other with our firearms and bean bag rounds, and we don’t hit each other with our batons.
4. The TASER should be moved up on the use of force continuum to hard techniques. Passive resistant suspects do not warrant use of the TASER and the TASER should not be used as a compliance control device.
5. New training methods and procedures regarding use of the Taser should be implimented.

The above stated points should be addressed. The longer this device is used without proper testing, study, care, and respect, the longer people will unintentionally suffer unwarranted injury or death as a result.  There are now many cases pending regarding people who died shortly after being hit with the TASER – and it was in situations where lethal force would not have been used or permitted. One thing should be remembered above all else-  as law enforcement officers, we commit to protect the public and to serve. It is a cause greater than ourselves. The TASER is a tool, not a symbol of loyalty. There is no reason why law enforcement cannot take grounded approach to the issues discussed here concerning the TASER.  We are loyal to the oaths we take and that includes getting to the bottom of how safe this device truly is before we subject someone to its use unnecessarily.

References

14 year old girl shot in head with taser. (2009). Retrieved from

http://current.com/items/90490049_14-year-old-girl-shot-in-head-with-taser.htm

Anglen, R. (2009). Taser advises police not to aim at chest. Retrieved from

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/10/21/20091021taser1021.html

Celizic, M. (2009). Great-grandma dared cop to tase her, so he did. Retrieved from

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/31202935/

Chicago study calls taser safety claims into question. (2008). Retrieved from

http://www.ppao.gov.on.ca/pdfs/sys-tas-cbc1.pdf

ex-taser worker alleges she was threatened. (2009). Retrieved from

http://www.rcmpwatch.com/ex-taser-worker-alleges-she-was-threatened/

Officer injured in taser demonstration . (2007). Retrieved from

http://www.janes.com/news/lawenforcement/pr/pr071011_1_n.shtml

Study raises concern over taser’s safety. (2006). Retrieved from

http://www.yourlawyer.com/articles/read/11338

Taser training bulletin . (2009). Retrieved from

http://www.fbinaa.org/files/public/TaserTraining_Bulletin_MEMO_10_14_09%5B1%5D.pdf

Non-lethal weapon kills utah man. (2009). Retrieved from

http://blogs.sltrib.com/slcrawler/index.php?p=741&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Watson, S. (2008). Doctors condemn “threatening” taser court ruling. Retrieved from

http://www.infowars.com/doctors-condemn-threatening-taser-court-ruling/

The Nigerian man claimed he had been sent to destroy the plane on orders of Al-Qaeda. What could have been a very terrible disaster during “the most wonderful time of the year” ended in success as the passengers of flight 253 swarmed the terrorist as the explosives failed. Christmas miracles do exist after all. The plane was able to land with no life- threatening injuries.

The reason this event is one of massive significance is due to the fact that the world and even the U.S. is increasingly falling into a state of malaise and denial. A pre-9/11 mentality is taking hold and rhetoric such as “man caused disaster” is taking the place of common sense. Is it really going to take the periodical terror attack to remind the world that there are people with a violent agenda? The World Allies need to step up to the plate, and quit acting as if this is a law enforcement issue. This issue is one of massive scale, and the perpetrators have made it very clear they are at war.

One issue that seems to confuse people is the concept of terrorism itself. People must realize that after 9/11 the world changed. It will never go back to a pr-9/11 state. While you would think this was clear, many just seem not to comprehend this. They speak about “winning” the War on Terror as if there is one leader who is going to sign terms of surrender. This is false, and the sooner people wake up to this the better. This is not a war in the traditional sense. In terms of terrorism, it never will be.

When many think of the War on Terror, they often think of roadside bombs, air strikes and the engagement of military powers. According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, war is defined as follows: “a: a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b: a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease>” (Merriam-webster online dictionary, 2008). Much like The War on Drugs, or The War on Disease, The War on Terror is a fight against an ideology. Fighting does take place, but it is a class war in the true sense. You have opposing philosophies squaring off to do battle. In this case the United States and her allies believe in human rights, the freedom of religion, happiness, and a world free of oppressing theology. The other fights for an Islamic world- wide government that will rid the world of all non believers, Muslims included.

Obama and his administration must wake up before harsh lessons of the past are repeated. The War on Terror is very complicated, which requires much research to accurately comprehend.. There are mass amounts of disinformation, mainstream “talking points”, and popular clichés that all fail to accurately bring the situation to the table. Iraq clearly had much ambition to further its threat to the West. When 9/11 took place, a great game of chess was unleashed on the world and threats needed to be prioritized. With the Intel that had been provided, and the Intel that has been found since, it is safe to say that Iraq is a logical military action determined to provide arms into the hands of Islamic Jihadists. Before 2001, history shows that the United States suffered from constant terrorist attacks. Since going on the offensive, there have been minor attacks throughout the world, and none on United States soil. This fact cannot be ignored. The War on Terror is effective, working, and necessary to secure the safety of this nation and her Allies. This is a world issue, not just a United States one. While the world continues to turn a blind eye, rogue nations of the world continue to arm themselves. History should serve as the ultimate guide when dealing with such issues. Hitler was ignored and not taken seriously at face value. His intentions were not hidden, and yet nations continued to ignore the warnings. That ignorance was paid by the blood of fifty million people whose lives were lost during WWII; all of which could have been avoided with proper intervention and action. Action is the key word in that statement. Sometimes it is not enough to sit back and talk; at times action must be taken and someone will have to do the heavy lifting. People must wake up. It should not take the occasional man on a plane trying to blow us up, or a terrible car bomb to remind us that these people are real and are bent on doing us harm. Ignorance and complacency may be comfortable and convenient, but it comes with a price and it is a luxury we can no longer afford.

References

Irwin, J. (Photographer). (2009). passengers help foil attack on detroit-bound plane. [Web]. Retrieved from

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091226/D9CR18JO0.html

Merriam-webster online dictionary. (2008). . Retrieved from

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/WAR

By Vanessa, the “Afro-Conservative”

In the wake of Derrion Albert’s death, I find myself increasingly disillusioned by the current state of Black America. While African Americans comprise 13.5 percent of the population, 43 percent of all murder victims in 2007 were African America. Of the 43 percent who were murdered, 93.1 percent were killed by African Americans.

Was it always like this? The answer is Unequivocally: NO.

The disproportionate crime rates, illegitimacy rates, divorce rates, drugs abuse, and disproportionate incarceration rates didn’t begin until liberals took over the Black Community in the 60s. Before liberals came and negated the influence of the Black father, over 80 percent of black children in 1960 were born in wedlock. In 1940 the illegitimacy rate amongst Blacks was 19 percent. Today, post the liberals monopoly in the poor urban areas, the illegitimacy rate is over 70 percent and almost 90 percent in the inner city. Surprisingly, between 1890 and 1940 Blacks had a marriage rate slightly higher than Whites. According to Herbert G. Gutman author of “The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom (1750-1925)”– for every 6 children under the age of under the of 6-5 of them lived in two parent households. In Harlem between 1905 and 1925, only 3 percent of all families were headed by a woman under 30. In this same time period, 85 percent of black children lived in two-parent families.

The training ground for any human being begins in the home. The dynamics of the home environment can do two things: it can set the child up for failure or for success. When Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat began seeing the negative trends of entitlement programs regarding the Black Family in the 60s he wrote the “Moynihan Report”. In the “Moynihan Report” he predicted that if the Black family continued to disintegrate, then there would be issues of delinquency, crime, disproportional educational outcomes, and other social problems that come when a father isn’t active in a child’s life.

What did the liberals do with this information? They called Moynihan a racist! They decried that he was “blaming the victim” and that he was against the “strong black woman” and that she could do it all by herself. Well, it wasn’t all by her lonesome because the nanny state (LBJ’s Great Society) was going to be there to replace daddy. Part of the stipulations for receiving welfare was that the Black father was not able to be present in the home. Therein lies the beginning of the destruction of our families.

Well, on behalf of the Black race, I want to thank all the liberal feminists who screwed up Black America with their entitlement programs and their warped world views. I want to thank the Saul Alinksy’s and all the “community organizers” who used the Blacks as pawns to advance their Marxist agenda. The progressives of this day had it all figured out. In order to eradicate the capitalist foundation of this country, they would need to put as many people on the welfare rolls as possible. The progressives didn’t care about Blacks before this. They were too busy empathizing with Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini. Look it up. Moreover, racist Progressives like Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood) were too busy pushing their eugenics (i.e. let’s kill off as many black people and other “undesirables” as possible).

Do you think Lyndon Baines Johnson and John F Kennedy cared about Blacks in this time? Lyndon Baines Johnson and John F Kennedy didn’t even support civil rights legislation until it became politically convenient to do so. Neither supported the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (pushed by REPUBLICANS). In fact, the same president we thank for Great Society, Mr. LBJ said, “President Truman’s civil rights program “is a farce and a sham–an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty. I am opposed to that program. I have voted against the so-called poll tax repeal bill. . .. I have voted against the so-called anti-lynching bill.”

Liberals managed to destroy an institution that survived the most heinous of circumstances.

So, what’s the answer?

More government? Obama? PUHLEEZE! Spare me! Obama has the same prescription for the REST OF AMERICA that the Liberals had for Blacks in the 60s. It’s not going to work. When you want to think of what a liberal utopia will look like in America (don’t think of Stalin’s Russia, Mussolini’s Italy, or Hitler’s Germany-I know it’s tempting) just picture the ghettos of America.

Hey liberals, You cannot help lift people out of poverty by taking from one group to give to another. All that happens with redistribution of wealth is a new “slave” that the liberals can count on that will always vote for them. Contrast that to the Conservative Republican response to poverty, which is change your values, maintain strong family structures that create human capitol, and then stay out of the private sector so the private sector can do what it does best-create WEALTH. That way it becomes nearly impossible to become slaves to the Conservative Republican “system” of economic revitalization.

The answer for Black America is getting back to our values. Not the values of the amoral, nihilistic liberals. We need to go back to a place where we reject moral relativity. We need to encourage Black men to marry Black women before they bring children into the world. We need to stop “dogging” Black people who are educating themselves and speaking proper english. We need to stop calling them “sell-outs” and “uncle toms”. We need to stop saying “You talk like a White person” when one of “us” speaks proper english. Intelligence is not strictly “white domain”-no matter what liberals tell you. Liberals continually want to absolve Blacks of personally responsibility. Liberals say we kill each other, we rob from each other because we “don’t know any better” or because ” we can’t help ourselves”. That’s bull. We do know better. We can do better. We will do better when we get back to our “roots”. What are those “roots”?–God, Family and Education. More Government, and Obama definitely aren’t part of the prescription for a better tomorrow.