Posted on 11/22/2005 2:38:16 AM PST by The Raven
Your post would make a good op ed.
I'll repeat this part for emphasis:
"The basic American notion of a presumption of innocence is not meaningful or useful in cases like that of Saddam Hussein."
That right there is the big million dollar question, isn't it?
My personal opinion is that since the end of World War II, nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons have always been seen as last resort, "doomsday" weapons, the application of the principle of "Mutually Assured Destruction" and all that stuff. Although these weapons have always rightly concerned us, I don't think that prior to the 9/11 period that our government ever honestly believed that our enemies would actually escalate a war against us to the level of using such weapons.
Now of course, we know otherwise, and I think it scares the hell out of the people in high places in America to know that our enemies not only hold the "keys to the kingdom", but that they would actually take it to the level that they have. Better not to have the average American people dwelling on such things like whether their next letter or bottle of medication is going to have an anthrax cloud in it.
It very rarely gets widely reported in the media, but law enforcement drills simulating an anthrax attack are done on a pretty regular basis now in big cities all across the country. It's not too hard to figure out why.
The story has been regularly misreported by everyone but Epstein. What makes this report most intersting is that he shows (a) a leak from our intel people to AP made further investigation impossible, and (b) the Iraqi intel officer who met with Atta, Al-Ani has been in CIA custody for some time and we have done a terrible job of interrogating him.
Why aren't we spending any time investigating this instead of the non-outing of an non-agent? Why haven't we recognized the seditious behavior of the anti-Administration apparatchniki in Foggy Bottom and Langlely?
Whatever else we know about the anthrax, we know that nobody knows that Saddam did not attack us with it (whether via the hijack cells or otherwise).And that, in that circumstance, it was exceedingly dangerous (i.e., as bad as fleeing Somalia after Mogadishu) for America to allow Saddam to remain in power after 9/11.
"Innocent until proven guilty" could have no part in Bush's strategic analysis of that situation . . .
Contemporaneous with the original story of Atta in Prague I somehow managed to establish an email relationship with a Czech reporter in Prague. I was looking for some info closer to the scene. I can't even remember his name now but I remember this, his reporting was that Czech intelligence never changed their story, their position is and always has been that Atta met with Al Ani in Prague.
BTTT
ping
During the Cold War it was considered a definite possibility that germ or chemical agents might be used as a prelude to the Warsaw Pact invading NATO countries.
Better not to have the average American people dwelling on such things like whether their next letter or bottle of medication is going to have an anthrax cloud in it.
I went through more than one military service school regarding the effects and use of "CBR", Chemical, Biological, Radiological, (the acronym dates me to the 60's and 70's). That said, given my preference, I'd rather be "nuked" than "bugged", i.e. anthrax, or "sprayed" i.e. chemical (nerve gas). Nukes can obviously be seen when they explode and their radioactive debris can be easily detected and collected or decontaminated. Anthrax, OTOH, is extremely insidious. It can arrive silently in the mail or by corn-on-the-cob and would spread, unannounced, exponentially before it could be stopped. If Hussein, and those in his regime, were as prone to evil as we believe, then anthrax would be his weapon of choice.
As for the anthrax cases that occurred immediately to 9/11, I have no doubt that the hi-jackers mailed their letters before they boarded their aircraft prior to 9/11 and these spores spoke Farsii with a Russian accent.
Whatever the source, the material (especially that sent to Capitol Hill) was so finely milled a state was certainly involved. And if anyone doesn't think it was meant as another warning, he's nuts.
I agree. I think this is one of the reasons that Bush invaded Iraq. The Taliban did not have the ability to manufacture "weaponized" anthrax. By process of elimination it came from Iraq ( motive, method, capability spelled oil money, and method). For the Iraqi's, the anthrax was just a "prank" and an experiment to see if it could be effective in the US. To the "war room" in the WH, it was gut evidence that Iraq was associated with 9/11. Bush did his duty as CIC.
Since NONE of the myriad other evidences and clues of an Al Qaida-Saddam-9/11 link have even been addressed, much less "de-bunked", by the leftist opposition to the war, that effectively ends the "Iraq War Debate". We won. Take care everyone, and drive home safely.
The CIA apparently has a bunch of Clintonites much like the State Department. Plus, I don't know that they wanted their secret world opened and merged with the other intelligence department like it has since 911. There seems to have been a lot of resistence and major growing pains in that organization.
I doubt that we are. In fact, I doubt that we even did DNA tests on the sheikh and all his purported Baluch relatives..
....then someone in our intel agencies REALLY sucks. I don't know who is in charge of such interrogations and research on connections between scumbags, but this is the kind of stuff that has to be examined microscopically, exhaustively, so to speak. Anything less is just incompetence or worse (Clintonistas not wanting to come up with the 'wrong' answers for the liberal cause???).
Beats me what's going on, Enchante..I just am not seeing them doing things that I'd expect them to. I think all those Baluchis are not related, except to Iraqi intel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.