Well that's not quite true now is it. There is a link between one of the targets and one of the 9/11 terrorists, for one thing. There is the Arabic writing, references to "Allah" and "Israel", on the envelopes, for another. There is the dead hijacker who showed signs of anthrax infection, for a third.
Then we stack those up against - what? - the (D) after Senator Daschle's name. Perhaps you can see why it irks me somewhat that everyone's jumping on the "right-wing extremists" bandwagon...
Attacks on Daschle (a liberal democrat that many feel is ultra liberal),
First of all I see nothing "liberal" about Senator Daschle. He's a left-winger, not "liberal". But more importantly, he's not considered so "left wing" by more extreme left-wingers in the first place. Don't believe me?
Here is an article on the World Socialist Web Site complaining about the bankruptcy reform bill of last year, which closes by complaining that: "Collusion between major credit card companies and politicians is, however, not limited to the Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Thomas Daschle was among the majority of Senate Democrats who voted for the bankruptcy measure. His state of South Dakota is home to a Citigroup Inc. credit card operation in Sioux Falls. Daschle has received $45,000 in political contributions from Citigroup in the last six years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics." I guess they don't like him either. After all he's such a sellout and a tool of big business, against the common man.
Maybe they did it? In fact, that's what I think. I think the World Socialists did it.
There, now we have enough "evidence" to write a rebuttal article to the one which started this thread, titled "World Socialists suspected of being behind biowar threat". Because after all, they are "suspected" by me... ;)
Can't you see why the irresponsibility of this whole thing bothers me a little bit?
Brokaw - a liberal media person disliked by ultra right wingers and conservatives.
Again, while we on the right may think of Brokaw as left-wing (not "liberal"!) biased, that doesn't mean that everyone does.
Here is an article complaining about the "right-wing media" which has some pretty harsh words for Brokaw ("And you Brokaw, you slackjawed little punk, if I here so much as a whimper out of you, you'll get a swift bamboo whack across your cheeks") for "protecting conservative politicians".
The targets picked so far just do not ring true for mid-eastern terrorists attacks
Again, this is just lazy thinking. Is it so perplexing to you why mid-eastern terrorists would want to attack the Senate Majority Leader, the most important legislator in the country?
Is it so perplexing to you why they would attack a tabloid which ran a story saying that Osama had a small penis?
Is it so perplexing to you why they would attack NBC and Fox, when they consider basically all mainstream American media outlets to be biased towards Israel?
Just think about it some. This argument from ignorance ("At the moment I just can't think of why extreme Islamicists would want to attack those people...") is simply pathetic.
rather more ultra right wing/militia types that hate all government, hate all policies that increase government surveillance, hate NATO, hate UN, hate coalitions.
Uh, whatever. Now you've lost me. I mean the way you describe what right-wingers stand for is accurate enough. But, have NATO targets been attacked w/anthrax? UN? "coalition"? In fact it sounds like you simply have a bone to pick with right-wingers. Perhaps you ought to work out these issues in some other way.
The fact that Tom Daschle is part of the government is simply not a very good reason to think he must have been attack by right-wingers because they hate the government. Right-wingers do not have a monopoly on hating the government. What about left-wing "anti-globalist" anarchists such as the ones who rioted in Seattle?
Or for that matter: What about Islamic terrorists? Hmmm? They don't exactly love our government.
Again, only speculation as is most everything else on FR. Don't get all excited.
I know it's speculation and that's exactly my point. You call it "only speculation" in an attempt to belittle it, but perhaps you don't realize that what you are doing is playing into the hands of people who care more about using this issue to scapegoat conservatives than they care about stopping terrorism. This "speculation" is not completely harmless. It's nasty, corrosive, divisive stuff, which is why I'm trying to nip it in the bud where I can.
A mid-eastern attack would hit more symbols of our western culture - the things they hate. I don't specifically know where those attacks would be directed but attacks on Microsoft? Why would terrorists go after them? The AMI I can understand. Just do not understand Brokaw and not Fox, Daschle and not a conservative representative.
Sorry you get upset that someone has any suspicion against militia types - however they themselves create the atmosphere for suspicion. They support each other in hatred for their own government, they feed each other hate and it engenders hate.
There are no-doubt many great militia people. Why not - the militia starts out as true patriots seeking others to prepare for a government that turns against its own people. However, it also attracts any that love to hate, love to play war games, and would be a prime target of those seeking to undermine the government of a country.
A true patriot should be aware of this fact even more than me - a woman poster on FR. Of course, terrorists types would gravitate to a group they find that has people arming, that furthers anti-government rhetoric and provides a source of potential recruits for their future deeds.
How hard is it to understand that militia groups can easily be corrupted into hate-filled groups of war hungry individuals antsy to go after their own government? Possibly infiltrated with undercover terrorists or anti-American individuals.
Why do individuals leave these groups - that should be the question to investigate. What is it that makes people leave a militia. I would think they come to see the group has evolved into something they do not want to be part of. Why? What caused the change in the group, who caused the change?