OK. I heard this on the radio about 3 hours ago, but didn't pass it along then because I thought it was a joke. However, it is now being reported at several news sites overseas. I'm going to check snopes, but figured it was at least worth posting at this point.

Pentagon reveals rejected chemical weapons



15 January 2005
From New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe (http://www.newscientist.com/subscribe.ns?promcode=nsarttop) and get 4 free issues.



<!-- AdtechUtils - JavaScript - $Revision: 1.3 $ - slotId="ns_news_mpu" --> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- var myDate = new Date(); AT_MISC = myDate.getTime(); document.write('<scr' + 'ipt src="http://adserver.adtech.de/?addyn|2.0|289|113568|1|170|target=nsad;loc=100;misc=' + AT_MISC + ';">'); if (navigator.userAgent.indexOf("Mozilla/2.") >= 0 || navigator.userAgent.indexOf("MSIE") >= 0) { document.write('http://adserver.adtech.de/?adserv|2.0|289|113568|1|170|ADTECH;loc=200; (http://adserver.adtech.de/?adlink|2.0|289|113568|1|170|ADTECH;loc=200;)'); } document.write('</scr' + 'ipt>');// --> </script><script src="http://adserver.adtech.de/?addyn%7C2.0%7C289%7C113568%7C1%7C170%7Ctarget=nsad;loc=100;misc=1105721004562;"></script> <noscript>http://adserver.adtech.de/?adserv|2.0|289|113568|1|170|ADTECH;loc=300; (http://adserver.adtech.de/?adlink|2.0|289|113568|1|170|ADTECH;loc=300;)
</noscript>
THE Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.

Other ideas included chemical weapons that attract swarms of enraged wasps or angry rats to troop positions, making them uninhabitable. Another was to develop a chemical that caused "severe and lasting halitosis", making it easy to identify guerrillas trying to blend in with civilians. There was also the idea of making troops' skin unbearably sensitive to sunlight.

The proposals, from the US Air Force Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio, date from 1994. The lab sought Pentagon funding for research into what it called "harassing, annoying and 'bad guy'-identifying chemicals". The plans have been posted online by the Sunshine Project, an organisation that exposes research into chemical and biological weapons.

Spokesman Edward Hammond says it was not known if the proposed $7.5 million, six-year research plan was ever pursued.

From issue 2482 of New Scientist magazine, 15 January 2005, page 4

"a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow...



You can say that again! :D

cues up Tom Jones...

We could of caught them with their pants down.

"a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow...Best. Line. Ever.

http://www.geocities.com/gottimd/stormtrooper.gif

Does it look like a giant penis as it flies through the air?

cues up Tom Jones...

Yep...I have that in iTunes...

http://www2.lush.com/cgi-bin/lushdb/157?expand=00003:upd=y

Do Not Taunt Sex Bomb

LOL! This is a great find Skydog. :D Some really funny stuf there.

I just find it a little creepy that they were trying to make a bomb to make soldiers homosexually attracted to one another. This would be interesting to bring up when the next "gay by choice vs gay by birth" flame war breaks out.

SI

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other.

Just like we always hear about NASA, this could have a lot of potential spin-off value for commercial and recreational use among civilians.

I just find it a little creepy that they were trying to make a bomb to make soldiers homosexually attracted to one another. This would be interesting to bring up when the next "gay by choice vs gay by birth" flame war breaks out.

SI
Esp. under the Clinton Admin, huh?

http://www.geocities.com/gottimd/stormtrooper.gif

That is horrible... :D

You got something against Storm Troopers?

Give me anthrax. At least you'd be dead. Imagine the horror of waking up after that stuff wore off.

You got something against Storm Troopers?

That guy is still cracking me up. :)

http://www.lovehoney.co.uk/prodimages/biggie/CN65.jpg

sex bomb?

had to delete the
evgeny plushenko ice show "sex bomb" post. Somewhere i messed up on formatting.

had to delete the
evgeny plushenko ice show "sex bomb" post. Somewhere i messed up on formatting.

Theres only so much blantent homosexual ice skating overatures that a message board can take before it loses it.

Theres only so much blantent homosexual ice skating overatures that a message board can take before it loses it.

Since you asked for it.

http://www.windweaver.com/coi/plush89406.jpg

:D

http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_159222541.html

Pentagon Confirms It Sought To Build A 'Gay Bomb'

Hank Plante
Reporting

(CBS 5) BERKELEY A Berkeley watchdog organization that tracks military spending said it uncovered a strange U.S. military proposal to create a hormone bomb that could purportedly turn enemy soldiers into homosexuals and make them more interested in sex than fighting.

Pentagon officials on Friday confirmed to CBS 5 that military leaders had considered, and then subsquently rejected, building the so-called "Gay Bomb."

Edward Hammond, of Berkeley's Sunshine Project, had used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a copy of the proposal from the Air Force's Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio.

As part of a military effort to develop non-lethal weapons, the proposal suggested, "One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior."

The documents show the Air Force lab asked for $7.5 million to develop such a chemical weapon.

"The Ohio Air Force lab proposed that a bomb be developed that contained a chemical that would cause enemy soliders to become gay, and to have their units break down because all their soldiers became irresistably attractive to one another," Hammond said after reviwing the documents.

"The notion was that a chemical that would probably be pleasant in the human body in low quantities could be identified, and by virtue of either breathing or having their skin exposed to this chemical, the notion was that soliders would become gay," explained Hammond.

The Pentagon told CBS 5 that the proposal was made by the Air Force in 1994.

"The Department of Defense is committed to identifying, researching and developing non-lethal weapons that will support our men and women in uniform," said a DOD spokesperson, who indicated that the "gay bomb" idea was quickly dismissed.

However, Hammond said the government records he obtained suggest the military gave the plan much stronger consideration than it has acknowledged.

"The truth of the matter is it would have never come to my attention if it was dismissed at the time it was proposed," he said. "In fact, the Pentagon has used it repeatedly and subsequently in an effort to promote non-lethal weapons, and in fact they submitted it to the highest scientific review body in the country for them to consider."

Military officials insisted Friday to CBS 5 that they are not currently working on any such idea and that the past plan was abandoned.

Gay community leaders in California said Friday that they found the notion of a "gay bomb" both offensive and almost laughable at the same time.

"Throughout history we have had so many brave men and women who are gay and lesbian serving the military with distinction," said Geoff Kors of Equality California. "So, it's just offensive that they think by turning people gay that the other military would be incapable of doing their job. And its absurd because there's so much medical data that shows that sexual orientation is immutable and cannot be changed."

Man, Bubba's probably hiding out in fear of being "infected"...

They could have just gave them an energy drink.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/Gayfuelcan.jpg

As laughable as this idea is, I think the target here was more to create a sexual instinct than turning someone gay. Since nearly all of the soldiers would be men, I think they came up with the "gay" part of this as a means to the end. Had the military units been 50/50 men and women, they still would have posed this idea as a way to make the units attracted to each other. But of course, this story has more legs if you throw the gay thing out there as the crux of the story.

Why they just didn't ask Cupid how he does it, and saved the money, is my question!

http://www.geocities.com/richard_simmons_fan/gallery/image7.jpg

As laughable as this idea is, I think the target here was more to create a sexual instinct than turning someone gay. Since nearly all of the soldiers would be men, I think they came up with the "gay" part of this as a means to the end. Had the military units been 50/50 men and women, they still would have posed this idea as a way to make the units attracted to each other. But of course, this story has more legs if you throw the gay thing out there as the crux of the story.


I had pretty much the same take as you. This is someone trying to get more legs out of a story than it really deserves.

On my command, "Gas, gas, gas," you're gonna don your protective ass cover, make sure they're sealed soldier!

Well, the idea is straight out of a bad sci fi movie, so it deserves some press. But the gay angle is really unncessary and somewhat misleading.

At least it happened while Clinton was in the WH, so the gay angle couldn't be fully blown out of proportion. This was clearly an example of his "don't ask, don't tell" policy - they shouldn't have asked for money to conduct this kind of BS experiment, and I'm sure he didn't want them telling anyone someone made this proposal!

Sorry, this isn't from the Onion?

If there was a chemical that had the potential to make anyone you want so desperate for sex that they would even seek out the opposite gender if they had to, that could be developed for $7.5M, it would already be made and both you and I would have an order on backorder.

If there was a chemical that had the potential to make anyone you want so desperate for sex that they would even seek out the opposite gender if they had to, that could be developed for $7.5M, it would already be made and both you and I would have an order on backorder.

So you're saying it's Clinton's fault that we're not all having sex with whomever we want, whenever we want? :) Or maybe he did authorize this, but kept the trial packets for himself?

I remember this, um, coming out a few years ago. I was curious about the proposed design because, as far as I know, any chemical that might be capable of doing that sort of thing (oxytocin?) could never get through the blood-brain barrier by inhalation. As I recall, though, they didn't actually have a real design--they were just tossing ideas around.

Also, wouldn't this violate chemical weapons treaties?

So you're saying it's Clinton's fault that we're not all having sex with whomever we want, whenever we want? :) Or maybe he did authorize this, but kept the trial packets for himself?
No, that's the Puritans' fault. Damn blue laws...

Also, wouldn't this violate chemical weapons treaties?

And that would stop the US military from using it because...???

I have never heard of something so diabolical since the Nude Bomb.

I'm putting 2 + 2 together here....

Now I think I know the REAL reason we were so paranoid about the Canadian's "poppy coin." The whole "radio frequency transmitter" thing was just a cover. Those coins were specially formulated to counteract the effects of our Love Potion Bombs!!! :eek:

I don't find this surprising at all. In fact, I recall hearing something along these lines a few years ago.

set us up teh ghey bomb k plz thx bye!

I don't find this surprising at all. In fact, I recall hearing something along these lines a few years ago.

Yeh, I just looked it up: it's the same thing I read about a few years ago. And, having just read the actual document (http://www.sunshine-project.org/incapacitants/jnlwdpdf/wpafbchem.pdf), it seems to have been completely blown out of proportion.

The short, three-page R&D proposal actually describes three categories of potentially useful, non-lethal chemical weapons. Some of the ideas actually sound pretty good (e.g.: marking criminals/combatants with a persistent odor perceptable only to trained dogs). There is only one paragraph mentioning homosexuality, and only in the context of a larger category of chemicals that could afffect behavior. In doing so they only mention it as a hypothetical "example" and note that the idea is "distasteful." Here is whole paragraph, in context:

Category #3: Chemicals that effect <i>[sic]</i> human behavior so that discipline and morale in enemy units is adversely effected <i>[sic]</i>. One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior. Another example would be a chemical that made personnel very sensitive to light.

That's it. The $7.5 million figure quoted in the article was an estimate for R&D for entire project, including all three categories of chemicals.

Once again, facts get in the way of a good story.

"a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow...



You can say that again! :D

Man, that's funny!!! :p

Ah, good, election year politics heating up (else why bring this up again?).

Noting, of course, that an "election year" is really 2.5 calendar years, or about 1,000,000,000 stress years.

Who wants to tell him?

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=1480442&postcount=23

Who wants to tell him?

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=1480442&postcount=23

The threads have been merged. I had forgotten about it until whomever dug up the old one and merged it with the new one.

Do I win?

The threads have been merged. I had forgotten about it until whomever dug up the old one and merged it with the new one.

Yeah, I know. I was just kidding around -- I had to quote this very thread to do it.

Yeah, I know. I was just kidding around -- I had to quote this very thread to do it.

Yeah, I guess so. I don't know who wins, but I lose.

Can I get one of these bombs?

I can just see going home one night, "Hey hon, man do I have a bomb to drop tonight!"

Heh. Turns out my father was one of the high-muckity-mucks at the Wright Lab in 1994. Coincidentally, that's the same year I moved off-campus and roomed with a gay grad student who went by the nickname of "Leatherboy". I had to reassure my dad about five times that school year that I wasn't gay, just a theater major.

All they had to do was export hockey overseas in the 1980s.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b208/eagleeyekid/RAW%20CARDS/gay_gretzky.jpg

"I like unicorns and long walks on the beach with Mark Messier."

I wasn't gay, just a theater major.

Don't theater majors have to minor in gay?




:p :D :D

Don't theater majors have to minor in gay?


Actually, it turns out that they don't have to...and there are starfuckers even in HS and college. :D