Friday, March 12, 2010

Don't ask, don't tell. Ah, just don't ask...

The U.S. is always trying to come up with new and better weapons systems. Some of them never see the light of day. Many of them are just plain stupid.

According to BBC News, who got it heresay from a group called the Sunshine Project, who supposedly got it through the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, the Pentagon was working on several odd weapons of mass confusion back in 1994 at a research facility in Ohio. Of course the BBC reported it with a very serious face, as if it were gospel truth they had checked and rechecked personally. The BBC is DEFINITELY not biased against the U.S. or the U.S. military.

Supposedly, the U.S. researched:

A "gay bomb" which would make enemy soldiers fall in love, or at least become sexually irresistible to each other. While we then killed them, I guess.

Another was supposed to be something that made the enemy all get really bad breath. The BBC article actually said, "... make them "obvious" by giving them bad breath." I don't know what that means. Maybe if you were in a dark room with them and had to feel for them to kill them, you would know who the friendlies were. Like that. You just smelled their breath before you gutted them in the darkness. I don't know. I will give you the address of the BBC and you can write to them and find out what they meant by "obvious."

Then there was the diabolical weapon that would attract swarms of wasps to sting the enemy. But not sting the pure Americans, I guess. That's just crap that the BBC made up - I'll bet it was really the Royal Army that made up the wasp weapon. Americans would never do stuff like that.

The insane attacking rats was a bit far fetched though, even for the BBC. I called a friend at the Pentagon who works in Special Weapons Division, and he said, "It's important to point out that only those proposals which are deemed appropriate, based on stringent human effects, legal, and international treaty reviews are considered for development or acquisition."

Then, off the record: "Besides, you should know by now that the BBC is full of shit. Did they tell you the one about the chemical we dropped on a herd of sheep that caused massive flatulence? They didn't even know about that one, I'll bet."

URGENT UPDATE: Apparently the "A1e Flatulence, Aerial Inducement" weapon actually was real and was about to go into production when it was discovered (just in time) that certain Slavic countries, apparently potential enemies, namely Bulgaria, actually enjoy the smell of farts.


  1. Hilarious! Do you know that some people here believe that Aids was "made" to be a weapon? By you guys of course. Anyway, imagine the poor ladies who'd have to kiss the soldiers with bad breath? Urg!

  2. Looking very good! :) Nice new playlist too.


  4. Why am I suddenly reminded of Star Trek episodes?

  5. The gay bomb story has been around for a lot of years, it's not just been popped up by the beeb.
    Is it true?
    I'd expect the answer to be "partly".
    In the nineteen fifties, sixties, seventies, all manner of crazy ideas were tried out with a view to weaponisation. Some made it into production, some did not.
    There was certainly research into LSD bombs, and other methods of introducing hallucinogens into the water or food of 'the enemy'.

    The CIA conducted a lot of studies into LSD, Mescalin, Psylocybin etc., with a view to their efficacy as incapacitants and as ways of getting people to talk freely or do actions against their will.
    Soldiers, sailors and airmen were sped up, augmented, and sent to sleep by pills. Combat pilots on speed screamed through the skies, uppers, downers, switch on, switch off, purple haze!

    Nope, I don't find the idea of the gay bomb any more bizarre than the stuff we already know about.
    I assume field tests proved it unreliable.
    One assumes the attacking forces would be expected to be oh so butch.
    "Straighten those seams, soldier, and get some more lipstick on!"

  6. Here's some interesting stuff. of course, it might all be cleverly faked by the BBC, but then again, maybe not.

  7. @Patchwork - Thank you. I got the idea for the post from someone else though. I just stole it.

    @A. - Thank you very much. All it needs now is a map in the upper right. :)

    @Boris Legradic - Well, if it's on Wikipedia it MUST be true. Heh. Btw, have you seen our new invisibility cloak? What if the invisible man had bad breath? Flatulence? Could he be stung by W.A.S.P.s? I wish you would give these deeper things some thought and stop wasting your time hanging out at Wikipedia. :)

    For the record.. (are we keeping a record of this stuff?) I wasn't trying to dispute the truth of the story. I only wanted a forum to bash the BBC.

  8. @ Janet - Hey, a new post! I will be right there. Don't get me started on Star Trek. :) But you are right.

    @Soubriquet - You make it sound so plausible. Some say men have landed on the moon, too, but who is going to believe that?



Related Posts with Thumbnails