The Washington Post has said that the FBI Amerithrax Task Force has posited that, when a Gitmo detainee (this Kabul military commander) told them that there was a storage of anthrax in Kabul, that it was made in the US and transported there. (Which is consistent with the travel of many operatives there during this timeframe).
For you not to include the story about what the USG has charged the Gitmo detainee with (possession of anthrax) renders you and your readers unable to “connect the dots” — and understand the Washington Post’s summary of the Amerithrax matter. For starters, you miss the identity and position of the person the Amerithrax Task Force was getting its information from. You also miss the allegation that the detainee has been charged with possession of weaponized anthrax.
Which leaves your analysis throwing a gutter ball.
U.S. Spy Chief: 9/11 ‘Could Have Been Prevented’
Director of National Intelligence Says U.S. Didn’t Connect Available Information
http://www.abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3621517&page=1
Given the stark difference between Cheney’s view of the anthrax attacks [see Hayes, CHENEY (2007), at 356-359] and Ed’s views, Ed should err on the side of including the recent national AP story alluding to the accusation that the Kabul military commander had weaponized anthrax for use against US targets in Fall 2001, upon the Fall of Kabul.
He should also include the article about the Taliban information minister being captured with anthrax packets for mailing to government officials (according to the longtime Afghan governor) so that the claim can be confirmed or debunked.
There simply is no reason not to do so.
Blinders are only useful in bowling — not true crime analysis or intelligence analysis.
There is a good quote by Rice from Summer 2006, I believe, to Hayes about how Cheney spearheaded the government’s response on the issue of the terrorist threat, especially anthrax. Hayes draws attention to his PBS interview with Lehrer.