"Building a nuclear capability would cost $1 billion or more, require 1,300 engineers, and take years. Developing biological weapons could cost less than $100,000, require five biologists, and take just a few weeks, using equipment that is readily available almost anywhere in the world." Science News 5/18/96 See their web site for the full article with references and sources. A number of questions other than the pure cost of development occur: Based on recent statements by "officials" of the former Soviet Union a number of "suitcase" nukes are missing. Possible sale price - $1,000,000. Cheaper than what is described above but substantially more than the biological agent development. AND teh "B" option is an ongoing operation that is readily transportable and much less easily detected by conventional means. Which way would you rather go? Disregarding the creative chemistry experiments available under your sink and around the house, but considering the way the government and media can characterize any assortment of household items or literature a question arises - If you have meat in your refrigerator do you in fact have the basis for a biological weapon of mass destruction? The fact that many foods can be readily converted (by improper handling or outright negligence) to poisons can beg the question of whether having food in your posession does not constitute a health hazard to your children. AND we all know that the well being of one child is what it is all about. Don't we? Lest anyone consider this question facetious consider that several months ago, in Dallas, a city inspector was asked to comment on the condition of private home kitchens. Once again, folks, it is people, not knowledge that creates problems. Frank J. Egan ************************** *IT is not what we CAN do* * IT is what we WILL do * **************************