Special Hearings — Chemical And Biological Warfare Hearings — 1998-06-08

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Mr Vally you are not listening to what I am saying to you.  I said to you given the nature of the conflict that existed and given the perceived threat that was in position at the time, I could find a reason for the scientist to say, we believe that this type of organism could possibly be used against South Africa, not only against humans but against our plant life and also against our animal life in this country.  And therefore we need to study this so that we can develop a method of dealing with it, either an anti-toxin or another antibiotic or whatever the case may be.  That's what I am saying to you.
 But I also conceded to you that given the face value of this, and the fact that it appears on such a list and there are quantities named and a price attached to it, that is highly suspicious of either abuse or planned abuse.  I've said that.

MR VALLY: Fine.  And the same thing would apply to the anthrax in the cigarettes?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes certainly.

MR VALLY: And ...(inaudible) them in a peppermint chocolate?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Correct.

MR VALLY: Now the quantity of cholera being prepared here or part of this "verkope lys" the sales list.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes.

MR VALLY: Isn't that extremely sinister?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: You are saying ten bottles I think, is that right?  And another six bottles ...(intervention)

MR VALLY: A total number is 32, I beg your pardon, 32 bottles of cholera.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: We have no idea of what the quantity ...(intervention)

MR VALLY: We do, we were told.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No but I don't have any idea ...(intervention)

MR VALLY: Well fair enough ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: ...from what you are showing me here.

MR VALLY: If I put it to you ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: I thought this was also discussed yesterday in General Neethling's evidence, quantities.  I would have to know, can I proceed - I would have to know what sort of quantities you require to do the type of research you need to do to develop defensive systems against it, before I would be able - and I would have to know what the quantities are in these bottles before I can make any kind of judgment of saying this is totally excessive and must have had a different reason why it was produced.

MR VALLY: You see what worries me in your explanations, you know you concede on the anthrax on the cigarettes; you concede possibly the typhus vidiodin, I assume you'll say the same thing that it's unacceptable, is that right?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes Mr Vally.  I've said to you that ...(intervention)

MR VALLY: Sorry if I could just finish.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Ja.

MR VALLY: So I take it that you will concede all those items where it's mixed with everyday items ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: That's correct.

MR VALLY: But what I find puzzling is if there are 32 bottles of cholera on one list headed "verkope" then that would be very sinister.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No Mr Vally you are not saying what I said I am sorry.

MR VALLY: No I'm saying that.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No I know, but you are turning my words around.

MR VALLY: Right.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: I've said to you, given this entire list as it stands there, appearing on such a list as a "verkope lys", the entire document is highly suspicious of possible abuse or planning to abuse.  That's what I am saying.  But you are asking me, would it concern me if cholera per se is studied, and I said no, it would not.  And I said to you when you started talking about the quantities here I don't have the information about the quantities and I don't know what quantities are required in order to do the type of research.  I've said to you already on this particular list that would be highly suspicious.  What more do you want me to say?

MR VALLY: Well I would like to know a very simple thing.  If the purpose for developing these cultures and manufacturing these chemical poisons was in order to prepare yourselves of the country or the Defence Force for attack, chemical biological attack, can you tell us what defensive systems you prepared, for example against anti - anthrax resistant to antibiotics?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Mr Vally I really have a difficulty in the way you are putting the question ...(intervention)

MR VALLY: Well let me rephrase it then ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No let me just finish this please.  You are not allowing me to say what I want to say.  The classical biological weapons includes anthrax.  If our scientists studied anthrax in great detail with regards to its toxicity and its transmissibility, contagiousness, all that sort of thing, its lethal doses and everything and they then determined what do we require to protect our troops against anthrax.  Then I would have no difficulty with that whatsoever.  But in the context of where it is on this list here I agree with you, this is highly suggestive of a planned abuse or an abuse.

ADV POTGIETER: No but General is there - General ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: I am listening, sorry.

ADV POTGIETER: Is there any other reasonable explanation?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: But I have been agreeing with you about this.

ADV POTGIETER: No, no, no, no you are not agreeing with the proposition, you are going half the way.  Is there any other reasonable conclusion that one can draw from this combination of deadly, potentially deadly substances on all day items ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: No you are right.  You are correct.

ADV POTGIETER: Is there any other explanation than that these things are murder weapons?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes I hear what you are saying and I was concerned when I saw it and that was the conclusion that I came to as well.

ADV POTGIETER: Thank you.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: But I do want to make this point, that anthrax as an organism per se was part of the legitimate programme.  I will have no problem with that.  Thank you.

CHAIRPERSON: I think that point has been made by you and I think we are noting it.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: We agree about this.

CHAIRPERSON: But I think we are going further and we are saying, it is quite clear, and you lay the basis for your understanding of the position to be that, there were things that were kept away from you because you only came to learn of them in 1997.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: That's correct.

CHAIRPERSON: It is quite clear that the suggestions as are in TRC document 52 are quite clearly that what was being created here, and as you put it, is suggestive of either an abuse or an intended abuse.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Correct.

CHAIRPERSON: In fact one of the scientists who was involved in this programme called it "murder weapons".  They didn't hesitate to put it in that sort of fashion.  You may not agree but at least the highest we can come to it raises my concerns that there are ...(intervention)

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: I understand.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Vally.

MR VALLY: Thank you.  If we agree that these are all potentially or most of them are potentially murder weapons, and if we see, because this list is headed "verkope", "sales", and the date is 19th of March 1989 to the 21st of October '89, and the dates have the heading "delivery date", so we are seeing items, deadly murder weapons, being delivered from mid-March '89 to almost to the end of October '89

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: That's correct.

MR VALLY: And when you discovered this list in February '97.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes.

MR VALLY: Were you shocked?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Of course I was.

MR VALLY: As Surgeon-General?

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes I was.

MR VALLY: And as someone who was ultimately responsible for Operation Jotta under which RRL fell.

DANIEL PETER KNOBEL: Yes that's true, yes I was.

MR VALLY: So what did you do, firstly to discover if there were any other deliveries of such poisons, did you make any such enquiries?