Just as the U.S. was beginning a secret program dropping biological bombs over North Korea & Manchuria in early 1952, Canadian & British scientists — and the FBI — were aware something was afoot
Thank you for your work. This book is showing as not available in either Kindle and book form in Australia. Any suggestions as to other suppliers besides Amazon?
Thanks, Richard. I could not find a copy to buy easily. I finally obtained the book on a temporary library loan from out of state (via University of Oklahoma!). I suggest at this point using either abebooks.com to search for a used copy, or go to the link I provided for the book in the post above. It's to SpringerLink, which offers a ebook download for 84.99. Somewhat more expensive options for paperback and hardback are also available. Pricey, I know! I see that they also offer individual chapters for sale as well (electronic, I presume). Most of the material I used came from Chapter 7, "The Drift of Biological Weapons Policy." The URL to SpringerLink for this book is https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057/9780230508095#:~:text=About%20this%20book&text=Drawing%20on%20recently%20declassified%20documents,warfare%20research%20programmes%20in%20history.
Hi Jeff, I am not one to defend the US and its atrocious military history and I am currently working on a documentary of the North Korean war showing more clearly how it was the US/South Korea who started the war not North Korea as is the mainstream narrative. However, regarding use of BW's in North Korea, I am unaware that this was confirmed. I am aware of the would, should, coulds, but not that they DID. The COMINT radio transmissions between Chinese radio operators discussing it don't prove it. I don't know how far this can be pushed. Warm Regards, Mario
Hi Mario, thanks for your thoughtful comment. I wish you much success with your documentary on the origins of the Korean War.
The question of "confirming" the use of BW in the Korean War will, for many, remain inconclusive short of some kind of written document revealing the orders being given, or something similar. I believe the COMINT reports, all two dozen of them, constitute sufficient proof of the use of BW *when combined with the other sources of information we have available*. In any case, I have a rather large article coming out soon (I hope!) that will lay out my case as detailed as I can. The article will include a rather complete takedown of the "evidence" gathered by Cold War scholars to the effect the BW attacks were a grand hoax.
The corroborative evidence on the BW attacks include the testimonies of 25 U.S. airmen, including high-ranking officers, of its use, including descriptions of how the orders were given and when. We also have the eyewitness reports of many North Korean villagers, of Chinese military in the field, of both North Korean and Chinese epidemiologists and laboratory personnel. There is also evidence from U.S. military documents, how lacking progress in their official BW program, the scientists at Detrick turned to "stop-gap" measures for "immediate effectiveness" during the Korean War. No opponent to the idea the US used BW in the Korean War has ever said or described what these classified "stop-gap" measures were. The timelines fit the alleged BW use in Korea, where the US used some combination of Japanese-designed and Canadian-designed insect vector weapons, including some experimental devices that Detrick's Special Operations Division were working on with the CIA. Insect vector BW research had been going on in Canada and the US since the late 1940s. Detrick had trouble producing the imagined cluster bombs delivering brucella viruses or smallpox or whatever, and the U.S. was desperate to stop the Chinese advance through central Korea in 1951 and cut off troop supply lines there. When these decisions were being made, the two disastrous retreats (of June-July 1950 and November-March 1950-51) were prominent in the minds of US political and military leaders, some of whom were lobbying for use of atomic weapons to turn the tide. The turn to BW followed on the lobbying of many "true believers" in its use, especially in the Army Chemical Corps and in the Air Force. The "blinking lights" I write about in this blog piece testify to the fact that the U.S. had made some dire decisions by the end of 1951.
I am wondering if you have read all the COMINT documents I collected? They report communications from both North Korean and Chinese units, including higher command, reporting (in most cases) "real time" the BW attacks. I would like to know how these records do not constitute sufficient evidence that the events recorded therein actually happened. Can you make an argument for that, rather than asserting they "don't prove it." The communications in question were made without knowledge that the encrypted messages sent had been intercepted. They went on for months (we don't know the full extent because all records are not released). The only theory I can think of to challenge the COMINT records is to conclude the transmissions were made deliberately to deceive, with the hope or suspicion they would be intercepted and confuse the enemy. This seems doubtful to me on a number of levels, but I won't argue it here as it could be said I was setting up a straw man argument. In any case, I am curious as to how *you* analyze the documents and how you find them unconvincing. I am always willing to be convinced on the basis of new information.
I also highly recommend reading the entire ISC report, including all the data gathered and discussed (critically, I may add) by Needham and company. I went to a good deal of trouble to bring the community at large both the ISC report and the COMINT material. I hope you and they make good use of it. Kind regards, Jeff
Morning Jeff and thank you. You've explained it as well as anyone could and I'm following a similar path with my core theme, that the US / South Korea started the war including on June 25th, which of course is not the narrative told & taught. I've laid it out convincingly as you have, yet have to acknowledge there are a dozen other versions of the story being claimed with a mountain of conflicting details and claims. Cheers, Mario
Thank you for your work. This book is showing as not available in either Kindle and book form in Australia. Any suggestions as to other suppliers besides Amazon?
Thanks, Richard. I could not find a copy to buy easily. I finally obtained the book on a temporary library loan from out of state (via University of Oklahoma!). I suggest at this point using either abebooks.com to search for a used copy, or go to the link I provided for the book in the post above. It's to SpringerLink, which offers a ebook download for 84.99. Somewhat more expensive options for paperback and hardback are also available. Pricey, I know! I see that they also offer individual chapters for sale as well (electronic, I presume). Most of the material I used came from Chapter 7, "The Drift of Biological Weapons Policy." The URL to SpringerLink for this book is https://link.springer.com/book/10.1057/9780230508095#:~:text=About%20this%20book&text=Drawing%20on%20recently%20declassified%20documents,warfare%20research%20programmes%20in%20history.
The evidence trail continues to grow. Good work, Jeff.
Thanks, Tom!
Hi Jeff, I am not one to defend the US and its atrocious military history and I am currently working on a documentary of the North Korean war showing more clearly how it was the US/South Korea who started the war not North Korea as is the mainstream narrative. However, regarding use of BW's in North Korea, I am unaware that this was confirmed. I am aware of the would, should, coulds, but not that they DID. The COMINT radio transmissions between Chinese radio operators discussing it don't prove it. I don't know how far this can be pushed. Warm Regards, Mario
One other thing. Thomas Powell, the son of John W. Powell, has recently released a new book that documents his findings on the Korean War BW controversy. You may find that of much interest. He has already published a number of articles on it at the journal Socialism and Democracy. See https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Ugly-Hidden-History-Korea/dp/0926664069/ref=sr_1_1?crid=FGQU4P2X44J9&keywords=thomas+powell%2C+the+secret+ugly&qid=1706041356&sprefix=Thomas+Powell%2Caps%2C216&sr=8-1
Hi Mario, thanks for your thoughtful comment. I wish you much success with your documentary on the origins of the Korean War.
The question of "confirming" the use of BW in the Korean War will, for many, remain inconclusive short of some kind of written document revealing the orders being given, or something similar. I believe the COMINT reports, all two dozen of them, constitute sufficient proof of the use of BW *when combined with the other sources of information we have available*. In any case, I have a rather large article coming out soon (I hope!) that will lay out my case as detailed as I can. The article will include a rather complete takedown of the "evidence" gathered by Cold War scholars to the effect the BW attacks were a grand hoax.
The corroborative evidence on the BW attacks include the testimonies of 25 U.S. airmen, including high-ranking officers, of its use, including descriptions of how the orders were given and when. We also have the eyewitness reports of many North Korean villagers, of Chinese military in the field, of both North Korean and Chinese epidemiologists and laboratory personnel. There is also evidence from U.S. military documents, how lacking progress in their official BW program, the scientists at Detrick turned to "stop-gap" measures for "immediate effectiveness" during the Korean War. No opponent to the idea the US used BW in the Korean War has ever said or described what these classified "stop-gap" measures were. The timelines fit the alleged BW use in Korea, where the US used some combination of Japanese-designed and Canadian-designed insect vector weapons, including some experimental devices that Detrick's Special Operations Division were working on with the CIA. Insect vector BW research had been going on in Canada and the US since the late 1940s. Detrick had trouble producing the imagined cluster bombs delivering brucella viruses or smallpox or whatever, and the U.S. was desperate to stop the Chinese advance through central Korea in 1951 and cut off troop supply lines there. When these decisions were being made, the two disastrous retreats (of June-July 1950 and November-March 1950-51) were prominent in the minds of US political and military leaders, some of whom were lobbying for use of atomic weapons to turn the tide. The turn to BW followed on the lobbying of many "true believers" in its use, especially in the Army Chemical Corps and in the Air Force. The "blinking lights" I write about in this blog piece testify to the fact that the U.S. had made some dire decisions by the end of 1951.
I am wondering if you have read all the COMINT documents I collected? They report communications from both North Korean and Chinese units, including higher command, reporting (in most cases) "real time" the BW attacks. I would like to know how these records do not constitute sufficient evidence that the events recorded therein actually happened. Can you make an argument for that, rather than asserting they "don't prove it." The communications in question were made without knowledge that the encrypted messages sent had been intercepted. They went on for months (we don't know the full extent because all records are not released). The only theory I can think of to challenge the COMINT records is to conclude the transmissions were made deliberately to deceive, with the hope or suspicion they would be intercepted and confuse the enemy. This seems doubtful to me on a number of levels, but I won't argue it here as it could be said I was setting up a straw man argument. In any case, I am curious as to how *you* analyze the documents and how you find them unconvincing. I am always willing to be convinced on the basis of new information.
I also highly recommend reading the entire ISC report, including all the data gathered and discussed (critically, I may add) by Needham and company. I went to a good deal of trouble to bring the community at large both the ISC report and the COMINT material. I hope you and they make good use of it. Kind regards, Jeff
Morning Jeff and thank you. You've explained it as well as anyone could and I'm following a similar path with my core theme, that the US / South Korea started the war including on June 25th, which of course is not the narrative told & taught. I've laid it out convincingly as you have, yet have to acknowledge there are a dozen other versions of the story being claimed with a mountain of conflicting details and claims. Cheers, Mario