WAR: Feds Asks Science Academy To Remove Article

The Department of Health and Human Services has asked a national science group to not publish an article describing vulnerabilities to terrorism within the nation's milk supplies. The paper demonstrated weaknesses within the national milk supply chain and provides suggestions for protecting the supply. The academy has not yet agreed to the request, and should be meeting with government officials today to make a decision.



So, now when a scientist has an idea on how to protect and fix known problems, the gov't just pulls the article. I have not read the article, so I cannot say exactly what information it contained that may have been a "security risk" but I would imagine they are probably things almost anybody with a slight interest in researching the national milk supply could figure out, especially if they are looking for holes. Not to mention the fact that CNN included one of the terror ideas in this article!

If a scientists cannot discuss problems and solutions to those problems with other scientists in a scientific publication, where can they? You can be certain the terrorists have similar open discussions amongst their "colleagues."

Related News Links:
www.cnn.com


[edit on 6/7/2005 by cohiba]

I tell you what...if there is a method of terrorism that we "non-terrorists" have thought up, there are probably a dozen more that "terrorists" have that are better.

I'm just wondering if the government itself will take it upon itself to read the article and consider some of their suggestions???

actually, I think the terrorists have one major weakness that if they would just let go of, well, they could hit us real hard.....I mean, with little thought or preparation, I could think of many, many ways to do major harm, and well, walk away afterwards, and possibly even remain free and at large!

But, well, the goal of the terrorist seems to be more in line of getting a free ticket to heaven than anything else....so, if they can't blow themselves up, it isn't worth considering.

It's hard to say where the line is when it comes to national security. Some reports I read leave me thinking, "why the hell are they telling people how to commit terrorism?". We should have freedom to publish any work, but not if it puts lives at risk.

If this was a how-to-guide on infiltrating security at nuclear power plants, should it be published? Botulism spread through the milk supply could be just as devastating.

The milk supply (breast milk) has already been contaminated by the terrorists that head up our government. Perchlorate (rocket fuel) contaminates breast milk and groundwater. The Superfund cleanup of toxic waste at deactivated Air Force Bases has also been suspended. Former Air Force Bases are some of the most toxic land anywhere. NO NEED FOR TERRORISTS. OUR OWN GOVERNMENT IS ALREADY KILLING US!!!!

I started to agree at first with the theme of the thread and that the gov't should not block scientist from discussing problems.
Then I finished reading the article (note related link goes back to the source).
Wien submitted a draft last year to HHS and at that time, HHS expressed their concerns over the work. Wien then informs HHS that he would go back over the article and then show HHS a new draft if and when he submitted it for publication Wien never contacted HHS again. Instead, Wien submits the work to a password secured site that is there for journalists to get an early release of news.
So, instead of this being a case of the goverment attempting to supress this information, or the goverment attempting to prevent scientists from discussing issues, it is more like Wien is just out to make a name for himself.
Also, HHS and the goverment have only asked NAS not to publish the work. The goverment have not blocked the publication of the article.
One other note, if Wien was in actuality attempting to address a true concern for the security of the milk industry, he would have first brought this information to the goverment as well as the milk industry to first inform them of the issues so that they can take steps to secure the vulnerabilities. Instead, Wein seems more inclined to make a name for himself. Remember, Wien is also the one that worked with the New York Times last week to publish other weak security concerns.
Sorry, I have to agree with the goverment on this one especially if the goverment is first able to at least be given the chance to address the concerns before Wien tels the world just how to kill thousands of innocent people.

Well....I don't see why the media hasn't already been axed yet then....I mean - Look at all the crap they throw out to anyone who's watching - Keeping us informed on every single movement of troops with embedded reporters....

Any terrorist watching the daily news could clearly use that to their advantage more than a glass of milk...

Oh - That's right...The media is allowed to continue b/c it pumps fear into the hearts of millions of Americans and keeps them glued on the TV so they can be brainwashed into thinking we're in the clear...

Meanwhile, scientific articles that strive to educate and prevent are censored to "protect" the "interests and safety" of the US....

The point here is how information should be handle and what can be allowed or not for the American public to read and come to conclusions if the government is keeping us safe.

One of the problems is how much control the government is going to exercise for " the good of security"

And then we have to ask ourselves then that terrorist are not stupid and by now they probably had already a handbook of how to poison us here in the US and that include our water supply also.

So perhaps what bothers the government is the fact that they don't want the public to really know how inadequate is their ability to keep us safe if terrorist indeed chose to attack us in any given way.

EnronOutrunHomerun,

Well....I don't see why the media hasn't already been axed yet then....I mean - Look at all the crap they throw out to anyone who's watching - Keeping us informed on every single movement of troops with embedded reporters....
Any terrorist watching the daily news could clearly use that to their advantage more than a glass of milk...
Oh - That's right...The media is allowed to continue b/c it pumps fear into the hearts of millions of Americans and keeps them glued on the TV so they can be brainwashed into thinking we're in the clear...
Meanwhile, scientific articles that strive to educate and prevent are censored to "protect" the "interests and safety" of the US....

Can you show me where the release of this article to the NAS publication
PNAS
Is only for the scientific community? Check out the site. You as well as anyone else can read the articles.
The site where Wein posted his work is a site that is for other journalists (not scientists). The site allows journalists to read scientific news prior to the official release of the article.
If as you are contending that the release of this article is preventing scientists and others that can actually evaluate the data, and recommend steps to minimize the vulnerabilities then why would the PNAS be available to the general public? When you add the above to the fact that the Wien article gives very detailed instructions as to how to take advantage of these vulnerabilities, how is this not something that can hurt or kill alot of people.
I for one do not agree with banning any information. I can agree to the need to delay the release of information (standard operating procedure for non-yellow journalists when working with goverment or the justice system) until steps can be taken to secure the weaknesses.

Let me put it this way, what is the difference between what the goverment has asked and me asking for things like:
your real name
your real address
your real phone number
your identification number
the access code to your home security system
the log on info to your computer?
Let me post that information to the web.
I am sure that you will not provide this information
Is that not the same exact thing that you are decrying the goverment for?

kenshiro2012...

Perhaps you misunderstood my point, or maybe I didn't express it clearly...

This is an article the Feds wish to do away with - Prevent anyone from accessing it....

To put it bluntly, the information contained in this article is good – The government wishes to mask it and play their fear tactics once again...

I mentioned that the media over-broadcasts sensitive material too often to simply point out the fact that there is quite a bit of information that is released over the news every night that in comparison is every bit as useful to a terrorist...

Therefore it's a clear example of hypocrisy, and once again, a clear indication of fear tactics...

That's what I was trying to say - I'm not implying we should ban anything - I guess read a certain way though, one could assume that was my intention - Hopefully this clears up my thoughts on the matter....


[edit on 6/7/2005 by EnronOutrunHomerun]

EnronOutrunHomerun,
I think we are both on the same page to a degree.
The way that I read the article, HHS has only asked that the article not be published to the NAS publication. They have not banned the article per se.
If Wein and NAS were to be allowed to publish the article to a scientific site that can be accessed by only those who have sceintific credentials or who would be able to actually take steps in closing the vulnerabilities, then I don't (beleive) that HHS would have any difficulty with that.
The only problem that I see with the article as is and the publication of it as has been attempted, is that it was for john q. public consumption. More in an attempt to raise alarm than to actually redress the problems.
If Wein wished to just raise the alarm, then publishing an article that DOES NOT have specific steps to be taken, then again, I do not think that HHS would have a problem with such.

WTF?
The The Feds actually *ask* them to please do the responsible thing and not publish, giving them a simple choice. And off go the cries of "censorship" and "control"!

There is a *huge* difference between asking someone to remove a report that could be damaging, and showing up "Steve Jackson" style and removing the reports, evidence, etc and destroying it so it can't get out.

But, I fear such subtlety is lost, when it comes to criticizing anything done by the current Administration.

Yet another exposed weakness, more doors open for the deaths of thousands. *yawn* Is anybody keeping count? It would be hard to keep count of all the terrorist threats and possible plots that we have been bombarded with by the media and whomever else, but it's not hard to keep track of how many have actually materialized, zero. If it is as easy to kill masses of us as we have been told over and over again, why hasn't there been even one more attack, even a small one?

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
We should have freedom to publish any work, but not if it puts lives at risk.

Osama succeeded in destroying America. By knocking down three buildings, he set off a domino effect that has common, ordinary Americans dismantling the Constitution and Bill of Rights line by line like Borg Drones gone random! Listen to yourself: "...not if it puts lives at risk"- if you qualify freedom of speech like that, THEN IT IS NOT FREEDOM OF SPEECH. And if you give up the right to freedom of speech, by God every kind and type of dissent is going to be labeled 'puts lives at risk'. I do NOT want Government to 'protect me'. Especially not FROM THE TRUTHS OF SCIENCE. Go watch Fahrenheit 451, or better yet, read the book by Ray Bradbury (before its banned too).

[edit on 7-6-2005 by Chakotay]

.
Instead of the government stepping up to address the issue, as usual it is
Blame the messenger.

How stupid is government?
How stupid are people for putting up with these kinds of governments.

There were scenarios of flying planes into buildings before 911 actually happened. Did any government body do ANYTHING? no. They are too busy with turf battles and winning budget dollars to protect the American people.

The spent 10 Billion on homeland security for trailers to haul lawnmowers around for parties, But can't be bothered to simply guard the Southern border of the United States.

If the American people elect these idiots and pay the taxes to support these lame bureaucracies, I guess there is no one to blame but ourselves.

Informative truth is not your enemy, unless you are completely stupid. Use true information to assist you in living sensibly defesively. Maybe the idiot government will follow your example.
.

Originally posted by Chakotay

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
We should have freedom to publish any work, but not if it puts lives at risk.

Osama succeeded in destroying America. By knocking down three buildings, he set off a domino effect that has common, ordinary Americans dismantling the Constitution and Bill of Rights line by line like Borg Drones gone random! Listen to yourself: "...not if it puts lives at risk"- if you qualify freedom of speech like that, THEN IT IS NOT FREEDOM OF SPEECH. And if you give up the right to freedom of speech, by God every kind and type of dissent is going to be labeled 'puts lives at risk'. I do NOT want Government to 'protect me'. Especially not FROM THE TRUTHS OF SCIENCE. Go watch Fahrenheit 451, or better yet, read the book by Ray Bradbury (before its banned too).

[edit on 7-6-2005 by Chakotay]

Exactly. I'll take the risk of dying from a terrorist before living in a police state under the guise of security.

Score one for the freedom of information folks. I was just looking back at some old topics, and found the homepage of the author. It contains much of his published information, articles, and work.

Home Page of Lawrence M Wein
faculty-gsb.stanford.edu...




-