(No subject)

[Guest guest]

no from line)

Subject: (no subject)

Received: (qmail 18652 invoked from network); 3 Feb 1999 19:58:23 -0000

Received: from unknown (HELO legend.idworld.net) (209.142.64.2)

by pop.onelist.com with SMTP; 3 Feb 1999 19:58:23 -0000

Received: from chris-s-compute (dnas-01-11.sat.idworld.net [209.142.68.219])

by legend.idworld.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id NAA00788;

Wed, 3 Feb 1999 13:58:23 -0600 (CST)

Message-ID: <36B8A9F1.5ADF@...>

Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 13:56:33 -0600

From: Gieseke <chrisgie@...>

X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT (Win95; U)

MIME-Version: 1.0

onelist

CC: chrisgie@...

Subject: Re: (no subject)

References: <36B868A3.872532EF@...>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

That was very well stated. I've been asking exactly the same questions

to the FDA and I'm currently awaiting a response from them. As you said

there is some HUGE inconsitencies in the DoD's Anthrax web page. If

they put out all the facts in a very straightforward manner they could

easily clear this whole mess up. This playing with numbers and dates

and leaving out the bad parts of research studies is not going to work.

We need straight facts to straight questions in complete detail, not

bits and pieces of info or incorrect and misleading information. If

there is something embarassing or some criminal wrong doing that they're

trying to hide

they need to fess up and put forth the individuals responsible to face

the music no matter how high up they are in the government.

Right now our media is obsessed with the sexual activities and coverup

of these activities by our President. That is peanuts compared to the

charge of knowingly experimenting untested vaccines and drugs on

soldiers without their consent which may indeed have occured during the

Gulf War and which may be the reason behind the wall we run up against

when we demand more specific facts concerning the Anthrax vaccine.

But with that said, we have to be on our guard against wild and rampant

rumors and not start conspiracy theories without hard facts. Right now

in my opinion, the hard facts point toward a coverup behind the vaccines

that were given to Gulf War vets. Were are the studies of them? If they

exhist, why has the DoD not put them up on their Anthrax information web

page or at the very least pointed to where we can research these

studies ourselves? We need hard facts. If the FDA or DoD can answer

all of Dr. Meryl Nass's questions (which I'm just echoing), and their

information adds up, then they could very well put this whole issue to

rest and I'll roll up my sleeve and take the shot when it comes my turn

as I'm sure most soldiers will do if the government is straight with

them on the facts.

I don't think the miltary planned on this kind of questioning of

authority from it's military personel because in the past we have always

been kept in the dark except when the media decided to take a fancy to

some story, but now today with the Internet, the governement can no

longer try to pull this kind of stuff, even on its loyal military, who

under most circumstances, are ready and willing to put themselves in

harms way in order to support our nations foreign policies and agendas

no matter how immoral we think they are on occasion. That is our job

and we do it to the best of our ability even if we don't like it. But

this where they cross the line and I think the government and the

military needs this kind of wake up call.

I'm very depressed that our nations top admirals and generals are not

demanding more information from their superiors. I guess they don't

think its worth ending their careers over and being replaced with an

ambitious officer who can shut up and take and pass down orders without

question. I'm not saying that they should disobey orders, but that if

they are worth the brass on their uniform, they need to strongly

question any order that may be unlawful especially when it comes down to

questions concerning long term health issues that may effect their

troops. In battle you normally can't second guess orders, because if

you do, it can result in the loss of lives and the failure of a mission.

But in peacetime on issues such as this Anthrax vaccine there is nothing

wrong with questioning if the legality of the order is in question.

If this Anthrax vaccine was approved by the FDA based on tests that were

in fact from a different Anthrax vaccine, then this drug may indeed be

an experimental drug. However this would depend on how the FDA legally

defines an experimental vaccine (I'm assuming they have a written legal

definition of what an experimental vaccine is considered as)) and how

much verifiable research they have on the actual vaccine that is

currently being given to members of the armed forces.

If I am interpreting the laws correctly concerning experimental drug

testing on military personel and *IF* it is in fact an experimental

vaccine, then because the military is forcing this vaccine onto its

soldiers without their consent, the order is in fact an unlawful order.

To see which law I'm talking about go to this web page:

http://www.dallasnw.quik.com/cyberella/Anthrax/human_subject.html

As we see high-level court martials go forth, I think we may see this

either proven or disproven in the face of hard facts. That is assuming

that the military panel, who will give judgment, is not tainted or

tampered with. Hopefully the arguements put forth in these

court-martials will be made available to the public.

G.

(sorry for the long post)