'U.S. Terrorists' Behind Mailed Anthrax: Report

NY Post ^ | 4/11/03

[knak]

April 11, 2003 -- The anthrax powder used in the 2001 mail attacks has been reproduced by the Army, which found it was made simply, inexpensively and with limited expertise, it was reported today.

The new research reinforces the theory that the mailed anthrax was probably produced by renegade scientists, possibly from terror groups, and not by a military program such as Iraq's, the Baltimore Sun said.

[weegee]

A reminder to the Post:

Bob Stevens at American Media died first (Oct 9th) and may have received his letter prior to September 11th.

[NetValue]

" Bob Stevens at American Media died first (Oct 9th) and may have received his letter prior to September 11th. "

Sorry but that fact provides no help in determining the origin(s) of the anthrax mailings.

[Prince Charles]

The anthrax powder used in the 2001 mail attacks has been reproduced by the Army, which found it was made simply, inexpensively and with limited expertise, it was reported today.

Such as by al-Qaeda ragheads slumming in Florida?

[gonzo]

"..."It tends to support the idea that the anthrax came from a domestic source and probably not a state program,"..."

We need a new awards program here - the Bull$hit-of-the-Week award.

"...the mailed anthrax was probably produced by renegade scientists..."

Who writes this drivel?..........FRegards

[aristeides]

it was made simply, inexpensively and with limited expertise, it was reported today.

Certainly contradicts a lot of earlier reports.

I wonder if somebody has decided to bury the case, now that Iraq is defeated without WMDs being used.

[MikeJ]

"Bob Stevens at American Media died first (Oct 9th) and may have received his letter prior to September 11th."

Sorry but that fact provides no help in determining the origin(s) of the anthrax mailings.

True, but it does raise an interesting point. If the first letter was sent just before 9/11, you'd have to admit it was one hell of a coincidence, and there is little distinction between coincidence and circumstantial evidence.

The timing does suggest - but of course does not prove - that these events were related. Terrorist events in this country are fairly uncommon, and the idea that two remarkable events would occur on the same week, from two totally unrelated sources, is a bit hard to accept.

[Fred Mertz]

The timing of this report certainly is supsicious, at least in my mind.

[eno_]

Quite so. I think there are relatively few people who believe in "domestic anthrax" anymore.

Then there are less visible but entertaining coincidences like two jets owned by an iffy Pakistani crashing on the same day. THAT got buried in the news, big time. I wonder what's up with that.

[NetValue]

"The timing does suggest - but of course does not prove - that these events were related. Terrorist events in this country are fairly uncommon, and the idea that two remarkable events would occur on the same week, from two totally unrelated sources, is a bit hard to accept."

Sorry. I was agreeing with you but it did not sound like it. By "origin" I meant that it points more to Iraq than to a domestic sender like Hatfill. I think Hatfill has been made into the Richard Jewell of the anthrax attack.

In my scenario there was a bio-chemist friend of Terrorist Atta, perhaps the same one who helped Ramzi Yousef blow up the WTC in 1993, and he mailed the Iraqi anthrax Atta brought back from Prague where he met with an Iraqi intelligence officer. The anthrax attacks followed and paralleled the 9-11 aircraft attacks to terrorize America with a classic "double whammy" planned to intimidate us and crush our will to fight. (Gigantic error by the Islamists!)

[bvw]

A recent "Oh Really?" update from our Federales, tracking down homeland terrorists!

Did the Army make a suitcase full and somehow mistakenly drop ship it to an Eygypt merchant sailor? Mistakes happen, I guess.

Call Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, maybe Barbara knows!

[Shermy]

Well the gravy-train of overtime pay working on Operation Hatfill is a bucket of loot well worth some disinfo.

< /sarcasm>

[bvw]

The date on this article is the very same date the merchant sailor died of anthrax!

[The Great Satan]

I get the feeling that the US may not be in a hurry to score points on the WMD front. And maybe this another case where the conventional wisdom is neatly inverted, and that serves their purposes well. On that scenario, we are all supposed to assume the administration is desperate to find Iraq's WMD, just as we were all supposed to assume that the administration was desperate to link Saddam to 9/11. In reality, the opposite is true. Flourishing the WMDs, if Saddam had to be let off with his life, raises the blackmail issue, which we'd really like to avoid. At the same time, if we fail to produce the WMDs, we give Putin et al a graceful out for their stance in the UN, which may have been our intention all along. (It was thinking about Putin's remarks yesterday that set off this train of thought.) You don't have to win every point to come out ahead, and we can come out well ahead even if our WMD claims are never backed up -- after all, we can always say, yeah, well maybe the WMDs have been destroyed, or some such blather. And there is much other good news to focus on coming out of Iraq. So, the concept is: take a calculated hit on one front to win the larger war. Got keep your eyes on that big picture.

[oceanview]

General Paul Vallely on OReilly tonight saying a "hot source" has Saddam in Belarus. That, plus Putin's comments with Blair, are very interesting. Still, you would think part of the deal is that Saddam can't start writing letters and appearing on TV from his Russian retreat. As far as the WMD goes, giving us a little VX or mustard gas to find couldn't hurt the deal. The other piece of the puzzle I wonder about: did we demand that he turn over his anthrax stocks, quietly of course, after his plane landed in Russia?

[The Great Satan]

Still, you would think part of the deal is that Saddam can't start writing letters and appearing on TV from his Russian retreat.

Yeah, well I think this business with the fax is bogus. We might even be behind it.

As far as the WMD goes, giving us a little VX or mustard gas to find couldn't hurt the deal.

It'll be interesting to see how they play it. If the idea is to deep-six the WMD angle and make nice-nice with the Russians and French, they'll probably still throw out a few bones like that to keep our own folks happy.

The other piece of the puzzle I wonder about: did we demand that he turn over his anthrax stocks, quietly of course, after his plane landed in Russia?

Well, we could demand anything we liked, but there is absolutely no way to ensure that some of that material isn't cached away somewhere -- it could be in a lock box buried by the side of Route 66 by Mohammed Atta for all we know. That's why the idea that this was ever about finding and possessing the WMD was never believable. It's about retaliating for 9/11 while ensuring Saddam has no incentive to use that capability.

Nevertheless, notice that virtually all the top weapons guys have surrendered. There's no problem spinning giving them lenient treatment -- that's what we did to Hitler's weapons guys after all. No doubt that was a big part of the deal -- if there was a deal.

[Mitchell]

Yeah, well I think this business with the fax is bogus. We might even be behind it.

So why couldn't the sightings of Saddam be bogus too?

[The Great Satan]

What "sightings" are you talking about? I am unaware of any "sightings" since Saddam's last public appearance on April 9.

[Mitchell]

I'm talking about that public appearance. I shouldn't have used the plural.

[The Great Satan]

So what are you suggesting? Saddam secretly puffed up like Robert De Niro playing Jake LaMotta, pre-recorded a videotape of himself looking like an unmade bed addressing hundreds of extras telling them that the Iraqis have been conquered and their rewards will be in heaven, and stashed it in a can somewhere to be played after the war was over? That is totally crazy. The tape is exactly what it appears to be: a beaten but defiant strongman giving a valedictory speech to his supporters before high-tailing it out of town.