Posted on 10/13/2001 5:02:03 PM PDT by Diogenesis
Iraq 'behind US anthrax outbreaks'
David Rose and Ed Vulliamy, New York
Sunday October 14, 2001
The Observer
American investigators probing anthrax outbreaks in
Florida and New York believe they have all the
hallmarks of a terrorist attack - and have named Iraq
as prime suspect as the source of the deadly spores.
Their inquiries are adding to what US hawks say is a
growing mass of evidence that Saddam Hussein was
involved, possibly indirectly, with the 11 September
hijackers.
If investigators' fears are confirmed - and sceptics
fear American hawks could be publicising the claim to
press their case for strikes against Iraq - the pressure
now building among senior Pentagon and White
House officials in Washington for an attack may
become irresistible.
Plans have been discussed among Pentagon
strategists for US air strike support for armed
insurrections against Saddam by rebel Kurds in the
north and Shia Muslims in the south with a promise of
American ground troops to protect the oilfields of
Basra.
Contact has already been made with an Iraqi
opposition group based in London with a view to
installing its members as a future government in
Baghdad.
Leading US intelligence sources, involved with both
the CIA and the Defence Department, told The
Observer that the 'giveaway' which suggests a state
sponsor for the anthrax cases is that the victims in
Florida were afflicted with the airborne form of the
disease.
'Making anthrax, on its own, isn't so difficult,' one
senior US intelligence source said. 'But it only begins
to become effective as a biological weapon if they
can be made the right size to breathe in. If you can't
get airborne infectivity, you can't use it as a weapon.
That is extremely difficult. There is very little leeway.
Most spores are either too big to be suspended in air,
or too small to lodge on the lining of the lungs.'
As claims about an Iraqi link grew, senior health
officials in Britain revealed they warned all the
country's GPs last week to be vigilant about the
disease. 'I think we have to be prepared to think the
unthinkable,' said the Government's Chief Medical
Officer, Dr Liam Donaldson. The Department of
Health confirmed the Government is conducting an
urgent review of Britain's ability to cope with chemical
or biological attacks.
US intelligence believes Iraq has the technology and
supplies of anthrax suitable for terrorist use. 'They
aren't making this stuff in caves in Afghanistan,' the
CIA source said. 'This is prima facie evidence of the
involvement of a state intelligence agency. Maybe Iran
has the capability. But it doesn't look likely politically.
That leaves Iraq.'
Last autumn Mohamed Atta is said by US intelligence
officials to have met in Prague an agent from Iraqi
intelligence called Ahmed Samir al-Ahani, a former
consul later expelled by the Czechs for activities not
compatible with his diplomatic mission.
The Czechs are also examining the possibility that
Atta met a former director of Saddam's external
secret services, Farouk Hijazi, at a second meeting in
the spring. Hijazi is known to have met Bin Laden.
It was confirmed yesterday that Jim Woolsey, CIA
director from 1993 to 1996, recently visited London on
behalf of the hawkish Defence Department to 'firm up'
other evidence of Iraqi involvement in 11 September.
Minimize Homeland Threats
As a matter of national security all mosques and Islamic Centres need to be closed. Muslims are under no religious obligation to go to a common place for prayer, nor do they have any form of worship that requires gathering together. They can say their prayers from their homes, and for those who do not belong in America - from prison, or on planes deporting them from this country, or even in camps.
If Saddam was in on 9/11, which I pretty much take for granted (I doubt his agents were meeting with lead hijacker Atta to swap shish kabob recipes), then he has already knocked down the WTC towers, killed 5,000 American civilians and tried to destroy the White House and Capitol. The real question is, how could he hope to do that and avoid being removed from power? He had to have an insurance policy. What was our insurance policy for forty years? Mutual Assured Destruction. How could Saddam threaten to destroy America, without nuclear weapons or ICBMs? Using biological warfare. How could he convince America that he has them, without forcing our hand and defeating the object of the threat? Possible answer: by incorporating a novel, low-intensity bioterrorism campaign into the terror plan. Make sense?
Hm. How do you explain the fact then, that Blair has told Bush that he would not support an attack on Iraq unless and until POSITIVE evidence is found that links Saddam DIRECTLY to 9/11?
Wellll, at least the way it has been introduced in the cases we've seen thus far, it seems to be a very poor one.
Don't misunderstand; I think we have MORE than enough to blast Saddam from here to Allah, but I don't think you can make the argument you're making in any credible way. "Terror" yes. "PsyOps" yes. But this has been NOTHING LIKE the unleashing of a "weapon of mass destruction." Shoot, Ted Kaczinski was more dangerous than this!
Sadammed attacks US civilians with Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Start warming up the nukes boys!
A biowar attack on the United States could kill over a third of the US population. That's comparable.
It has been retired, thank God, and thanks to Florida voters.
News update: They've already started
Unless, of course, there ain't no Baghdad.
Oh yes.
And not a tactical, fission weapon, either.
We should use a strategic hydrogen bomb, a fusion weapon, to atomize Baghdad totally.
Make it a place of legend, an ancient place, with thousands of years of history, obliterated utterly and eternally as a penalty imposed for its foolishly arrogant over-reaching.
DEATH to those arab leaders, terrorists and governments who DARE to threaten us.
FORGIVENESS and LIFE (under responsible governments) for those arabs who have not raised a hand against us.
Yes, well ... ahem ...
there are some Defense departments in Europe that might take offence to being called hawkish ...
Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death!
March 23, 1775 By Patrick Henry
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at the truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings. Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the numbers of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received?
Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlement assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation.
There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extentuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
I submit that they'll use them against us anyway.
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.