Microbiological growth has been known about for a very very long time and is now a well managed scenario. The horror stories of rotton fuel tanks are generally related to aircraft which do not recieve the frequent inspections which are REQUIRED by an a qualified engineer. Here, for example is the introduction into a frequent and exahustive check by Boeing:
"(1) The corrosion caused by the growth of micro-organisms can be a
serious problem. These micro-organisms, thriving at the interface
of turbine fuel and any trapped water are fed with the hydrocarbons
of fuel and mineral salts of water. They produce deposits with
corrosive action, which have the appearance of slime and vary in
color from grayish-white, when dry, to muddish-brown or black, when
wet with water or fuel.
(2) Fuel/water samples taken from each fuel tank should be tested with a
microbial contamination kit. Positive results for microbial
contamination require action which can include a biocide treatment
or physical removal of microbial growth from fuel tanks."
The check goes on to instruct the engineer to take fuel samples and test them with industry standard micro biological test kits. If growth is found in it's insipient stage then a treatment is applied LONG BEFORE IT LEADS TO CORROSION.
The original post is obviously by an observer who knows little or nothing about aviation and seems to confuse two issues. The first is the normal occurance of microbiological which is treated and managed by maintenance systems. The second issue is a specific event which occured in Australia a long time ago. I have no first hand or specific knowledge of this except that an Ozzie contractor related the story to me many years ago. He told me about the "grounding of the entire GA fleet in australia due to suspected fuel contamination which led to a fatal accident". The original poster tells us that mobil "added too much Ethylene Diamine" which sounds reasonable in the abscence of any other information. If this is the case then the cause of the accident was the aircraft was operated with UNAIRWORTHY FUEL. The unairworthy fuel may have resulted in a fuel blockage caused by microbiological growth.
Do I even need to explain the next deduction: maybe I do for the original poster as he/she seems to be very confused by it all. If normal airworthy aviation fuel is used in a normally well maintained aircraft then the "engine will not stop without notice" due to microbiological growth. If you choose to fly with SOME third world airlines which have shoddy maintenance and dodgey fuel suppliers then of course there is a risk. (Obviously SOME third world airlines are very proffesional)
From time to time companies like mobil will make a mistake with fuel production, and heinz will let glass contaminate baby food. And from time to time the results will be tragic. So whichever industry you may be in, it is important to look at the error and strive to ensure it doesn't happen again. And aviation, I am happy to say, has a better record than most industies of doing this.
Now that I have taken time to explain to you how pathetic the original post was, think I have earned the right to tell you to go jump in a fuel tank and set fire to yourself and not bother indusrty proffesionals with this diatribe