Replies

AMI ("National Enquirer") is readily explained. Both AMI and the New York Post were attacked. These are the major tabloid format periodicals in the country. Although this rapidly vanishing format is not representative of powerful journalism around here anymore, this is the form almost all major print media take in the Third World!

Also, "free" broadcast television networks were attacked, but not any cable tv operations. Mr. Atta and his associates were typical of so many Middle-Easterners. They didn't waste money!

Why pay for tv when you can get it free?

This characteristic colors their whole operation, including the purchase of envelopes at the Boca Raton post office. They obtained only the number they needed and not one more. They did not buy a book of stamps at the grocery store only to waste most of them when their attack would amount to no more than a half-dozen letters.

It is possible they used anthrax stolen from Ft. Detrick 10 years ago.

It was probably the cheapest stuff they could get!

Now that we are on the "cheapest at any price" trail, we might reconsider some of the anthrax "look alike" attack letters. Some of the materials stolen 10 years ago are reported to have been sterilized. It is entirely possible Mr. Atta and his associates purchased some of that stuff. It would probably be identified as some sort of bacteria, but would it be identifiable as anthrax? That's undoubtedly something the FBI has been investigating, but you don't hear anything about it do you.

That's because any admission that the anthrax attacker had an operational profile that identified him as a Middle-Easterner will be suppressed by agents inside the FBI who continue to demand the attacker be part of the American political milieu.

...we might reconsider some of the anthrax "look alike" attack letters....

Also the letters mailed from Indianapolis to Sean Hannity and possibly Bill O'Reilly.

There are real clues, but Rosenberg keeps trying to divert our attention to unsupported statements that appear to be designed to bolster a political position. I'd like to see her quote some actual evidence instead of the inconsequential and vague hints of insider information that she tries to base arguments on.

"That's because any admission that the anthrax attacker had an operational profile that identified him as a Middle-Easterner will be suppressed by agents inside the FBI who continue to demand the attacker be part of the American political milieu."

Instead of the FBI "demanding" the attacker be an "American terrorist", I'm thinking all of this is misdirection.

If, as we suspect, the anthrax was delivered by al-Qaeda and originated in Iraq, there is every reason for misdirection.

If this had become public knowledge at the time, there would have been a public outcry for action against Iraq -- something we simply weren't prepared to undertake with a depleted military and ordinance inventory.

Now, with Afghanistan behind us, forces already in the area and the pipeline behind them starting to fill, we can start training the sights on Saddam.

Proof that the anthrax originated in Iraq will also come in handy when our European allies start getting huffy about our "threatening gestures".

There was nothing to gain, and everything to lose, by a premature announcement. I suspect we'll discover the actual source of the anthrax once the stage is properly set.