I have always wondered about scientists that have been murdered or gone missing because of breakthroughs that could change the world, for the better, and the people that don't want to see such a technology developed: those who stand to lose money or power on such an endeavour: those that would even kill to prevent such discoveries from fruition. And came across this:

Dr. Ian Langford was a senior Fellow at the University of East Anglia's Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment. He was studying the environmental risks of air and water pollution. Dr Langford was forty-years of age and the cause of his death undetermined. Which is strange, to say the least, considering his naked body was found wedged underneath a chair and the walls of his living room were covered in blood.

Dr. Don C. Wiley, Havard biochemestry professor and researcher at Howard Hughes Medical Institute (which performs biological research, sometimes jointly funded by the NIH and DoD) and the National Institute of Health, was declared missing after his rental car was found abandoned on the Hernado de Soto Bridge outside Memphis, Tennessee. His body was found about a month later 300 miles south of Memphis snagged on a tree along the Mississippi River in Vidalia, LA. His death was ruled "accidental."

Dr. Steven Mostow, 63, infectious disease expert at the University of Colorada Health Sciences Center, was killed in a plane crash near Centennial Airport.

Dr. David Wynn Williams, Antartic Explorer, astrobiologist, microbiologist, exobiologist, killed in a road accident while jogging near his Cambridge home.

Dr. David Schwartz, microbiologist, founding member of the Virginia Biotechnology Association, and the Executive Director of Research and Development at Virginia's Center for Innovative Technology. He was regarded as an authority on DNA sequencing. Dr. Schwartz was found murdered at his home in Loudon County, Virginia. Officials state that he was stabbed in a "robbery attempt" though there was no signs of forced entry or stolen property. An adult and two teen-agers were arrested in the case. They were labled Satanists and Dr. Schwartz's murder was said to be part of a satanic ritual.

Dr. Tanya Holzmayer, biotechnologist, was surprised to find a pizza deliveryman at the door of her Montana home. Moments later a former colleague surfaced from the shadows, shot her in the head and ran off, police stated. The theory is that Guyang "Mathew" Huang, the former colleague, was fired by his ex-boss, Dr. Holzmayer, and was seeking revenge. Shortly after murdering Dr. Holzmayer, Mathew took his own life. Dr Holzmayer was helping to create new drugs that would interfere with the replication of the virus that causes AIDS.

Set Van Nguyen, microbiologist, found dead in the airlock entrance to the walk-in refridgerator in the laboratory he worked at, Victoria State, Australia. Victoria police state that "He did not know the room was full of deadly gas which had leaked from a liquid nitrogen cooling system. Unable to breathe, Mr. Nguyen collapsed and died."

Dr. Vladimir Pasechnik, microbiologist, found dead in a village in Wiltshire, England, near his home. His cause of death was deemed a stroke. Dr. Pasechnik worked for the Centre for Applied Mircobiology and Research at the United Kingdom Department of Health, and in February 20, 2000 formed a company called Regma Biotechnologies Ltd. Its purpose was to provide powerful alternatives to antibiotics. He died just six weeks after the announcement of a planned exhumation of the bodies of ten Britons whom died in a 1918 type-A flu epidemic. To this day no Type-A flu virus sample exists anywhere in the world.

In 1996 Dr. Tsunao Saitoh, CJD, Alzheier Disease neurological researcher, and his daughter were murdered in what LaJolla police called "a very professional hit.

In 1994, Jose Trias and his wife were murdered in their Chevy Chase, Md. home. They met with a friend of theirs, a journalist, before the day of their murder and told him of their plan to expose HHMI (Howard Hughes Medical Institute) funding of "special ops" research. Grant money that goes to HHMI is actually diverted to special black ops research projects.

Now, supposedly, all of these murders have to do with a secret genetic bioweapon that the United States has been secretly developing. This weapon, supposedly, can target individuals with specific genetic characteristics, say blonde hair or brown eyes, for example.

Does anyone know anything about this? Could such a weapon be created and if so can the people who create this "genetic weapon" render themselves or others immune?

Keep in mind, this has nothing to do with my aforementioned search. I am still working on that.

I just happened to notice your post. Although it's a bit old, I'm going to respond anyway simply because I have seen things... I never knew about any of this when I started working with a group you mentioned but left when I discovered some things that just weren't right! I'm speaking in generalizations here.

They are moving certain projects off campus to make it appear as though classified research is forbidden. Yet, they will then sneak it into an affiliated, off-campus lab, Trojan horse-style and try to pass it off as something else. Junior researchers almost never question their superiors and those who do (& receive belief-based justification for their work unsupported by previous studies) are swiftly let go for reasons other than what everyone else is told. So, most people who are carrying out preliminary experiments to serve as the foundation for later studies do not even realize what they are doing. Since by and large, the majority of these workers are also foreign, the likelihood that any of them will ask questions when they see something odd, is even smaller.

$ cuts at NSF, HIH, NASA, etc put pressure on principal investigators who, out of desparation to keep their labs afloat, agree to perform this work on a contractual basis. Labs can receive significant amounts of $ to keep them solvent but PIs end up relinquishing some control over their groups. In the event that the new overseers discover projects they were previously unaware of that could accelerate development, they will attempt to pressure these novice researchers into giving up that sensitive information by threatening their livelihoods which, whether they succumb to that pressure or not, ends their careers regardless. They're interested in synthetic RNA viruses & biosensors that could aid detection in the field. Shelf-life, the most significant hurdle which precludes practical usage of viruses as agents in this way (unlike sporulating bacteria such as anthrax), is being actively pursued, disguised under a different name & application, but of identical form.

Although I would not expect more disappearances, given the publicity generated by the last mysterious wave of "hits", we can expect continued silence from those contesting the plausibility of the RNA World-- an attractive model used in describing the origins and early evolution of life on Earth which, derives from modern biochemistry-- & directly violates the chemical constraints placed on this biomolecule that would have rapidly disintegrated any small amounts produced on Earth 4 billion years ago. Quite simply, RNA is too fragile. However, its versatility and ubiquity throughout modern metabolism and genetics make it "an easy sell" to those unfamiliar with the primordial environment. Widespread confusion over the definition of selection pressure as it pertains to driving evolution, acts as an ideal cover for the majority of American citizens. It is the ability to survive long enough to reproduce that dictates fitness in a given setting; not simple superiority at a given task under mild conditions.

From high temperatures that denature, to pH levels that prevent adsorption to minerals like montmorillonite clay (shown to catalyze RNA polymerization) to extremely low ribose yields from the formose reaction, to vulnerability to pyrite-induced hyrdolysis of the phosphodiester bonds that hold RNA polymers together... etc., it makes no sense whatsoever to use RNA for this purpose! So why are so many (WEALTHY & SUCCESSFUL) labs still chasing this notion? Why are so many researchers in this area doubting the relevance of their projects to their interests here? Why is free inquiry being squelched at all levels in the lab hierarchy (even where it was previously encouraged--& not part of the lab's culture?)? Who are these strange, unknown men who dictate what members will THINK about or ASK? IT IS STILL HAPPENING!!

I don't expect instant belief. Do your own research. That's what science is about!

I once read a work of fiction called 'White Plague' by Frank Herbert, where a bioweapon that killed women got loose in the world. I asked a girl I knew at the time when I read this, who had a degree in genetics, whether it was possible to create diseases that attacked certain characteristics like gender, and she replied that it would be theoretically possible, based on her understanding of genetics. I'd imagine that any characteristic that is defined by a particular genetic sequence could in theory be attacked, but I have no idea how easy or difficult this would be, or whether any kind of research has been done in making this kind of weapon.