Bioterrorism Charges Brought Against Professor 611
gnetwerker writes "Wired
and others are reporting about artist Steve Kurtz, professor at Univesity of Buffalo (NY), and member of the
Critical Art Ensemble will face a Grand Jury in two weeks on bioterrorism charges over artwork that used samples of harmless bacteria to make a statement about genetic engineering and food safety. He is charged with BioTerrorism under Section 817 of the PATRIOT Act. Apparently
John Ashcroft can't tell a weapons lab from an art installation. There is more info and a
Defense Fund on the CAE Defense Fund Site."
OH MY GOD (Score:2, Interesting)
Who else here thinks the government has gone too far? Is there no way to stop this insanity?
wtf are you talking about (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:If you test the system, they'll show you it wor (Score:3, Interesting)
Where does the PATRIOT act come into this? (Score:4, Interesting)
So where's the PATRIOT act charges come from? Because Slashdot isn't showing it.
From transgenic plants to bioterror? (Score:5, Interesting)
FBI field and laboratory tests have shown that Kurtz's equipment was not used for any illegal purpose. In fact, it is not even _possible_ to use this equipment for the production or weaponization of dangerous germs. Furthermore, any person in the US may legally obtain and possess such equipment.
If that's true (and the quote does come from the CAE defense fund page - obviously a biased source), it doesn't seem to me like anyone could have much of a case against him.
I think this is just a symptom of a more general problem - most people don't understand the biology of transgenic food, and ignorance breeds fear and suspicion. There's also the conflation of ideas between transgenic plants and bioterror organisms. Yes, some of the same lab techniques of gene manipulation might be used in both, but "transgenic" seems to get confused with "harmful".
I would be awfully surprised if this guy was growing something in his home that caused the death of his wife. And if he did, chances are it came in on whatever material he was studying - in which case that's who should be investigated.
On the one hand, I think Mr. Kurtz probably should have set up a lab in his university rather than doing it in his home. But to lose your wife (most likely to some freak of chance - an undetected heart problem, or whatever) and your livelihood as well, is a steep price to pay.
Thanks for the gratuitous Ashcroft bash (Score:3, Interesting)
So Kerry's actually more at fault for the Patriot act than Ashcroft or even GWB himself (on the theory that a 99-1 or so would override any attempt at a veto, not that W would have even thought of doing that...). Ashcroft's charged with enforcing the laws, not making them.
Re:Not likely Al Queda, but still terrorists! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I'm no luddite (Score:4, Interesting)
"We're 6.6 billion people now. We can only feed 4 billion; I don't see 2 billion volunteers to disappear."
-- Norman Borlaug [nobel.se] on Penn and Teller's Bullshit! - "Eat This!", speaking on the effects of removing modern farming techniques and genetic engineering from the food supply.
Sorry. I'm gonna have to take the word of a man who is estimated to have saved 1 billion lives and has a nobel peace prize over yours. Hope you understand. Don't take it personally.
Get used to it... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again(I wasn't first to say this, mind you)...
if you want an unlimited source of free energy, just attach a turbine to George Orwell's body
Orwell's vision is coming true, little by little by little... and if the American people don't stand up and do something about it, pretty soon it will be too late (if it's not already).
There's an election coming up folks... think long and hard about whether the people you're voting for are FOR or AGAINST this kind of shit. My suspicion is that any major party candidate is FOR this shit, personally.
Re:Eh? I'm confused! (Score:4, Interesting)
If you have AIDS and know it, and don't tell your partner, you can't even (legally) have sex -- license or not. And that's the kind of case we're talking about.
If you're breeding Anthrax in your basement (not saying he was -- maybe his stuff was harmless, and maybe it would have remained so -- or not) I want you stopped.
Sorry, your right to pursue your interest in your home stops when that interest might get out of control and kill everyone in the neighborhood.
Re:Some clarification (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh, and while you're at it, please reconcile:
You can't do anything harmfull with [E. coli, Serratia and Bacillus globigii]
. . . with:
Even harmless bacteria can become harmful under certain, but extremely rare, circumstances, said Richard Roberts, a leading DNA researcher.
That's what a grand jury is for (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a perfect case for a grand jury. There was a lot of stuff going on. Some of it seems criminal at first, but may not be.
The grand jury is there to decide what to do.
How should they decide whether to indict? Coin flip? Slashdot poll?
Also: The FBI is involved because there's an investigation to determine whether a Federal law has been broken. I is for Investigation. F is for Federal.
Re:Damn, what a bad summary. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OH MY GOD (Score:3, Interesting)
Politicians and diapers needs to be changed often and for the very same reason.
Funny and often true.
Re:This is actually valid. (Score:5, Interesting)
Anonymous Coward (accept no substitutes)
Another stunning display of ignorance (Score:5, Interesting)
And the FBIs' investigation of a book that contained 100yr old smallpox scabs [washingtonpost.com] and launched an investigation as to whether or not it was bioterrorism.
The fact is a woman died and the fact is the womans death was ruled "due to natural causes". So pardon me, but I do not see how a jury grand or not could be a better judge than a doctor trained to perform an autopsy and atoxicilogy lab. Perhaps if they ordered a few additional autopsies and toxicology tests... but a grand jury should not be concerned with a procedure so mundane as to have already been done by the police department.
That and the additional fact that no cultures have been found at said lab that pose any threat.
Overall, this does not add up.
It seems once again those who have brains and initiative should bee feared. Why doesn't Ashcroft just come out and say it? "All people with higher education than a highschool degree are a potential threat and should be watched closely".
Next thing you know the DoJ will be demanding the banning of home chemistry sets currently available at Toys 'R' Us and Walmart due to a "A very present and significant threat by educated youngsters against the free people of the world."
Re:Thanks for the gratuitous Ashcroft bash (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Come on, the poster should RTFA (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't claim to know anything about biology - at least, nothing more than I learned in an AP class some three years ago.
And nobody on Slashdot knows from these brief summaries the full story behind the case. For instance, when the police say they think bacteria have nothing to do with the death, are they only saying that because they're legally compelled not to accuse someone? Or do they really think that bioterror is an essentially implausible option and this fellow is just an activist a little too extreme to let slide? (His emotional state re: having a wife suddenly die is, apparently, not terribly important especially if he might have done it.)
Still, from the summaries alone - and this is a big caveat - the bioterror thing strikes me as a very familiar kind of alarmist angle used and supported by people that don't know any better. It's the kind of attitude that kept Kevin Mitnick (according to John Markoff of the New York Times an FBI Most Wanted List star, although he can't prove it) in solitary confinement for some eight months. Otherwise, a judge was convinced, he might start global thermonuclear war by whistling at NORAD through a payphone.
In the war against terrorism (can you wage war on a method?), letting our own ignorance make us deathly afraid of one another is tantamount to conceding defeat.
Re:I'm no luddite (Score:4, Interesting)
When you talk about ecological destruction, are you talking about the overpopulation "problem" that these technologies will create or the unfounded fears of watermellonpeace who are actually so anti-business that they'll delibertly mislead consumers or destroy crops. Study the introduction of the potato in the old world for some insight on how this planet's population ceiling has been raised over the past 10,000 years of agriculture and animal husbandry. As for convicing the environmentalists, I'm waiting for them to wrap their minds around the basics of GE/GM technologies, as the bulk of their arguments have been based on hatred for profit making business.
Re:OH MY GOD (Score:2, Interesting)
Ah... Now you are talking along my line of thought. When a terrorist (or activist with extreme thoughts) takes over a plane, you do not (as a passenger) know what his intensions are. At this point in time, you don not care - you are simply going to take away his ability to commit whatever act he had in mind - even if you did not know he simply wanted to only have 15 minutes of "air time" on national TV to talk about alien conspiracy theories. You aren't aware he only wants that while in your seat - but in this day and age you cannot take that chance. So you fight - even to the death.
This is the only way to deal with those whose intentions are unknown but threatening - whether on a plane or next door. Pro-active is what you stated - and that is all our government is attempting to do.
Re:Damn, what a bad summary. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a pre trial thing to keep people from being brought up on big charges with no evidence. The standard isn't very high, all the grand jury must find is legally sufficient evidence and reasonable cause to believe and they can return an indictment.
So a murder charge may well be pending. Depends on what the grand jury finds. They may find there is no evidence of anything, and refuse to indicte him at all. They may indicite him on murder, and other charges.
Re:OH MY GOD (Score:3, Interesting)
The sad facts: The center of the IQ field is 100. That means half the population is there, or under there. The majority of the country (not just those with 100 or under IQs) thinks god(s), or goddess(es), or some astrological constellation-wielding reincarnated future-seeing TV personality, created everything. The populace is, by and large, not very bright and/or deluded and/or other Very Bad Things. They're going to vote republican or democrat, because they simply don't know any better - and can't learn any better, either. They don't just think poorly, their thoughts consist of superstition and hokum. They swallow unmitigated tripe like "all persons are created equal" without even blinking. They absolutely wiggle with joy at the sound of the words "in god we trust" and they accept glittering generalities such as "anyone can become president" as if it were truth and not the basest of misdirection.
So... what that means is that votes thrown to marginal parties can only send messages of dissafection - if they change an actual result, they do it by tilting the election towards one of the two viable parties and away from the other. You can't involve the masses in a democratic exercise designed to correct complex political problems - They wouldn't know a complex political problem if it rose up and bit them in the butt.
Now, as long as that's ok with you, then your vote is being spent just as you want it to.
But please, don't vote libertarian with the idea that you might actually get a libertarian elected to the presidency. Speaking as a fairly rabid libertarian myself, I'm telling you that's a complete waste of your vote. You'd be better off spending the time doing something else. Almost anything else.
Re:OH MY GOD (Score:2, Interesting)
Being an activist does not give you a free pass to do whatever the hell you want. Anyone who has worked in genetics knows there are many regulations that you have to follow, for good reason. You can't just start up a biotech lab in your basement just because you have insane radical views.
"What will be next - will I br imprisoned for life without trial in solitary for burning a flag?"
First of all, he is not being "imprisoned for life without trial in solitary", he is being forced to stay in a hotel while his house is tested to make sure nothing dangerous is involved in his little science project. Minor difference between the two. This just proves to me that your post is a knee jerk reaction to something you have no clue about.
Second, yes you will be jailed for burning a flag... if you do so with an illegal biotech lab in your basement!
Re:I'm no luddite (Score:2, Interesting)
For example, in plant life there exists tons of herbicides and insecticides, developed to help the plant survive. Nicotine, and caffiene, for example.
But, they're going after fungus, and getting the BT toxin gene, putting it into corn and tobacco and the other cash crops. This is something that would quite likely never be developed in these species. Even after millions of years of cross breeding. Yeah, BT is killer stuff to bugs. In larger doses, it's not good for humans (or fungus for that matter).. Who knows what the long range impacts are from the large scale introduction of another toxin into our food chain.
Re:OH MY GOD (Score:3, Interesting)
That simply authorizes the use of force in Iraq. It is NOT a formal declaration of war. It does reference the war powers resolution, but that isn't a formal declaration of war. Declaring war is something the United States rarely does, the last time it was done was World War II.
Anyway, I'm posting the following just for the heck of it. The U.S. has formally declared war six times in its history:
1. First Barbary War
2. The War of 1812
3. The Mexican-American War
4. The Spanish-American War
5. WWI
6. WWII
The U.S. has been involved in many other wars that had no formal declaration: Iraq (2003), the Gulf War, the Korean War, Vietnam, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and the Civil War. It's interesting to note that more than half of all U.S. battle deaths are the result of these conflicts.
Re:Not likely Al Queda, but still terrorists! (Score:3, Interesting)
The only equipment needed for genetic transformation of "competent" strains of E. Coli is a hot water bath. They suck bacterial plasmids right into the cells and their genome.
You can go to a web site, enter in a gene nucleotide sequence, and get a vial of bacterial plasmid with your custome gene in a few days for as little as $500.
I'm not saying this guy is dangerous, there really isn't evidence that people can cook up anything worse in their kitchens using genetic modification than they could not using genetic modigication, but with a bit of soil and an incubator.
Re:From transgenic plants to bioterror? (Score:2, Interesting)
CAE's latest project, included a mobile DNA extraction laboratory for testing food products for possible transgenic contamination. It was this equipment which triggered the Kafkaesque chain of events. FBI field and laboratory tests have shown that Kurtz's equipment was not used for any illegal purpose. In fact, it is not even _possible_ to use this equipment for the production or weaponization of dangerous germs. Furthermore, any person in the US may legally obtain and possess such equipment.
In a political climate where the one loses all right to due process at the mere accusation of involvement in terrorism and with Education Secretary Rod Paige revealing the administrations definition of "terrorism" by labeling the National Educational Association a "Terrorist Organization" [cnn.com] for excercising their first amendment rights to criticize Bush Regime policy and a White House aide is quoted elsewhere in this discussion as saying "In this administration, you don't have to wear a turban or speak Farsi to be an enemy of the United States. All you have to do is disagree with the President" [capitolhillblue.com], there are some things about this particular case that should be regarded as red flags.
Educating people about the presence of unsafe GM organisms in their food could be the "terrorism" in question. In this case, it is not the Bush Regime who is being criticised but their sponsors at Monsanto. According to the Organic Consumer Association [organicconsumers.org] the link between Monsanto and the Bush Regime is almost as bad as the Haliburton/Oil Industry Links.
The death of Prof. Kurtz's wife combined with the biological laboratory is legitimate reason for at least some investigation. But it also could be a convenient excuse for an administration that is motivated to harrass him. If these artists have committed a crime, it is probably bad web design (Shitwave Flush (tm) web navigation) rather than terrorism. Unless the mutant flies and roundup-sensitizing compounds prove to be not just consciousness raising experiments but actual intended eco-terrorism; but I certainly don't trust the likes of John Ashcroft to make such a determination.
Re:Reality check time (Score:3, Interesting)
> which I've been posting lately, is that you folks have co-opted a
> political movement and philosophy that was once associated with
> patience, humility, and honor, constructed a bizarre mythology of code
> words in which anyone who disagrees with you is a Stalinist, that has
> wrapped a lust for power and wealth in the American flag.
Sigh. Guess you don't get out much.... or even watch TV. Socialists have a long history of wearing out one label and 'reinventing' themselves under a new one. Back around the turn of the 20'th Century 'Socialist' was a perfectly respectable political label. But as it actually went into practice and rapidly descended into the horrors of Stalinism in Russia and then National Socialism in Germany it fell out of favor for reasons which should be obvious to all. (If it isn't obvious to you, get off slashdot and pick up a history book!)
Thus the modern 'Liberal' was born. Swiping the name made respectable by the Classical Liberals of the 18 and 19th Century was a genius stroke of marketing. But by the 1970s and 1980s it had become obvious that people had caught on to the fact that the modern "Liberals" where the same old income redistributionists and group rights race baiters under a new name and if an opponent hurled the label "Liberal" and made it stick a pol was toast.
The Democratic party didn't start to face that reality for another decade when the "New Democrats" were born and Bill Clinton ascended to the White House. Then promptly set out to govern as caricitures of Liberalism, leading the voters to respond by creating Speaker Gingrich and Pres. Clinton stuffing a sock in Hillary's mouth and tacking towards the center a bit. But the "New Democrats" had an element in their movement who actually wanted to change the soap, not just design a new box with "New & Improved" on the label.
We now know which side won that battle for the Democratic Party. So now we have the Howard "I have a scream" Dean phenom and the "Progressive" movement, which is the same Socalists/Liberal ideas fired by anger now that the Democrats are nominally out of power for the first time in recent memory. Disagree with my assessment? Well then name some major policy differences between the three labels?
I'm not yanking code words out of my ass and seeing Commies under every rug, I'm reading their fucking webpages you silly twit. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to read a few of the fringe nutjob's webpages to confirm for yourself that 'critical theory' prattle almost always appears on pages by obvious crackpot Marxists. After all, they needed a new name for Marxism since even the Russians don't want anything to do with it anymore.
Which brings us to this specific asshat. He is making very public statements threatening to release chemicals to DESTROY CROPS! Should we really wait until he actually does it? Or knowing the gutless nature of most academic green terrorists, gets one of his young and stupid students to do it for him.
Not a free country - a costly one (Score:3, Interesting)
The state I live in had a catch all piece of legislation known as the "drugs misuse act", which gave "Patriot" style powers. No warrents, prisoners could be held for some time without charge etc - it was abused a great deal by members of the local police force until it was repealed, such a thing will be abused by some even if it is set up with the best intentions. Removing the checks and balances unleases all kinds of actions. Alarm bells should have run the second it was called the "patriot" act - vote against something with a name like that and you'll look bad, no matter what the contents of the bill are, since you would obviously not be a patriot.
As for the bioweapon shadow jumping, what really happened with the anthax? There's been a lot of sideshows and distractions since then.
Re:Damn, what a bad summary. (Score:3, Interesting)