Gay bomb plan by US

Gay bomb plan by US
"aphrodisiac" chemical weapon

Matthew Schulz
Melbourne Herald Sun

June 13, 2007

THE US Army planned to arm itself with "gay bombs" that would turn enemies into uncontrollable homosexuals.

The Pentagon has confirmed its military leaders had investigated the use of the non-lethal chemical weapon designed to target human behaviour.

Enemies would left helpless by mass gay orgies, as soldiers were irresistibly attracted to one another, weapons researchers believed.

Documents released to Californian-based watchdog The Sunshine Project show army researchers suggested the lust-spray could disrupt "discipline and morale in enemy units".

"One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behaviour," the 1994 research proposal says.

The documents indicate the project titled "Harrassing, Annoying and 'Bad Guy' Identifying Chemicals" would have cost at least $US7.5 million.

Documents released to The Sunshine Project under Freedom of Information laws also show other weapons in the project would "attract annoying creatures to the enemy position", including biting bugs, rodents and "larger animals".

Sexual attractants would also be a key ingredient in the chemicals designed attract the bugs and pests.

The project also aimed to identify "bad guys" with non-lethal chemical markers.

While rumours of a gay bomb have previously been circulated, The Pentagon last week, admitted it had considered – but rejected – the project proposed by the Wright Laboratory at an Ohio Air Force base.

"The Department of Defense is committed to identifying, researching and developing non-lethal weapons that will support our men and women in uniform," a Defence official told CBS 5.

The official also indicated the "gay bomb" idea had quickly been dismissed.

Previous unusual weapons believed to have been developed by the US military included invisibility cloaks and killing by mind-power.

Edward Hammond of the Sunshine Project told CBS he believed the military had given the plan strong consideration.

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

"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," he said.
---------------
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21899135-661,00.html
------------

Pentagon reveals rejected chemical weapons
15 January 2005
NewScientist.com news service

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