New lead roils anthrax probe

washington post via msnbc ^ | 3/28/02

[knak]

March 29

[Nogbad]

I was not quite right about that:

the numbers at the top of the letters read:

09-11-01.

I don't know if verses in the Koran commonly are numbered,
but I suspect there is a numerology attached to the book,
though I never have come upon any reference to such a thing.

[duck soup]

Anthrax in Chile does not match strain found in U.S.

Anthrax Puzzle Persists as Letter in Chile Looks Different From Those Found in U.S

U.S. Believes Lab Contamination Was Source of Anthrax in Chile

Anthrax: Letter to Chile Mailed from New York

At the time of the middle report, the FBI knew that the letter sent to Chile had been contaminated with anthrax.

Here are the excerpts: A Florida state laboratory that works closely with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed last week that the letter contained anthrax spores.

(Snip)

The letter could have been mailed from the U.S. and still received a Zurich postmark if it was processed by Swiss Post International (USA Inc.), a subsidiary of the Swiss post office. Swiss Post, with offices in New York and Los Angeles, is a wholesaler that handles overseas mail for about 30 U.S. businesses, said Michael Knorr, the company's director. Swiss Post is awaiting more information on the letter before deciding whether to test its facilities for anthrax, and Mr. Knorr said the company hasn't heard from the FBI or other investigators.

They found spores in the letter. The FBI later tries to state contamination at the lab in Chile was cause for the anthrax.

What strain was it that was found inside of the letter. And why no sense of urgency with the Swiss Post office.

[Mitchell]

On the other hand, we have bin Laden's own admission (FWIW) that he didn't learn of the attack's exact timing until the Thursday before.

I wouldn't place too much emphasis on bin Laden. I'd be very surprised if bin Laden was the mastermind behind the attack. All the evidence points to Saddam Hussein. (Bin Laden and al-Qaeda were presumably deeply involved, but that's not where the buck stops.)

We have repeated reports of sightings of Mohamed Atta (and two of the other hijackers, al-Shehhi and Jarrah) meeting with Iraqi agents in Europe on a variety of occasions. Are there any sightings of the hijackers meeting with known al-Qaeda operatives? (I'm not saying that they didn't, but the evidence is that the hijackers were more closely associated with Iraq than with al-Qaeda, since they met with Iraqi agents so often that multiple such meetings were observed.)

It is well-documented that many of the hijackers did not follow strict Islamic lives. Many of them drank alcohol. Jarrah had lived with his girlfriend, in Germany. They visited strip clubs and casinos. Their friends generally say that they were not Islamic extremists. This suggests that they were not Islamic fundamentalists, such as one would expect from members of al-Qaeda. Saddam Hussein's Iraq, on the other hand, is not a fundamentalist state; it's not exactly secular in Western terms, but it's fairly close. It's quite believable that the hijackers were agents of, or associated with, Iraq.

And why should we believe bin Laden's statements on operational matters anyway?

Seems to me that it would have been imprudent to set a date certain so far in advance. Instead, initial planning could have aimed at "sometime in September" and preparations proceeded on that basis.

Once all the pre-planning and preparations were in place, the final date of 9/11 could have been a function of the weather forecast. I agree that, once final preparations were set in train (e.g., on 8/28), a one or two-day delay would have been impractical.

That the saudi-binladin-group.com domain name was not renewed on, say, Sept. 9 or 10, suggests that, by that time, it was a done deal. That the domain name was registered on 9/11/2000 (so that it would expire on 9/11/2001) suggests that Sept. 11 was the intended date for at least a year.

Was there ever any confirmation of the rumors that these particular flights were heavily over-booked, presumably so as to reduce the number of passengers who would have to be controlled by the hijackers? I assume pre-planning would have focussed on a Tue-Wed-Thu timeframe, because of a.) somewhat lighter load factors and b.) high office occupancy at the WTC and Pentagon/Capitol/White House offices.

I remember this being stated shortly after 9/11, but I've seen no confirmation since. I don't know whether it's a fact or an unfounded rumor.

We also know that the hijackers "cased" these particular flights and routes in some detail. Presumably, they (or their accomplices) would have done the same for the WTC.

They seem to have planned the whole thing in detail.

And we do have the one plumber involved in the Memphis case who was known to have had a WTC pass immediately prior to the event.

This is new to me. What is the story?

[denydenydeny]

...some other significance known only to these twisted mystics

There is a belief that the attacks were timed to coincide with the destruction of the Muslim Ottoman army at the gates of Vienna in 1683.

The actual engagement happened on the 12th, not the 11th, but that day began the nearly unbroken series of military defeats suffered by the Ottomans (whose Sultan was the Caliph of Islam, let us remember--the position some say Osama aspired to) culminating in the absolute prostration of the Islamic world in 1917, when the Arab world was colonized by the European powers and the Balfour Declaration brought the Jews back to the Holy Land.

Staying with the thought, I think it's possible that for Bin Laden, September 11, 1683--when the Ottoman army was still besieging Vienna and held the city at bay--represented the last time Islam was feared by the West.

We may never know the truth about this, though.

[denydenydeny]

...a visitor's pass to the World Trade Center, dated September 5, 2001, was found in [the murder suspect]'s wallet.... This was extensively discussed on FR.

[denydenydeny]

are there any sightings of the hijackers meeting with known Al Qaeda operatives?

The closest that I know of can be derived from James Woods's recounting of his August 1, 2001 flight from Logan Airport to Los Angeles , the Flight 11 route. In what was clearly a dry run for the 9/11 hijackings, four Arabs acted suspiciously in first class, and there was a report filed with the FAA.

The really interesting thing was that Woods later positively identified two of the 9/11 hijackers on the plane that day--one who would be on flight 175, the other on Flight 77. This, I thought, was a vital bit of information, since it indicated that the hijackers from different flights worked closely together, and were not separated from each other in isolated cells.

In this thread, Freeper xm177e2 theorizes that

The terrorists probably put the men in different combinations on this test flight so they wouldn't raise any suspicions when they flew on the 11th. They wouldn't want to be seen travelling in the exact same groups, that's the kind of thing computers would be able to pick up on...

But to return to your question, I would note that Woods said something else very interesting in that same transcript linked above. He said that a "higher" government official confirmed to him that the two Arabs he didn't identify as 9/11 hijackers were definitely "terrorist-involved." Which means that it's a fair assumption that we're talking about al-Qaeda.

[Mitchell]

Thanks.... I'd missed the WTC connection in that story.

[Mitchell]

I agree that the date has some significance. The only possibilities I've found are:

• the declaration of the British mandate in Palestine (Sept. 11, 1922 -- but this was just one date in a series of events involving the British mandate and culminating in the establishment of the state of Israel)
• the Battle of Vienna in 1683, but most sources list this as Sept. 12; this represents the last attempt on the part of Muslim world to conquer the Christian West.

But maybe it should be a date in the Islamic calendar. Or, as you suggest, something from a Koranic verse.

I really don't know. But it has some meaning.

[Nogbad]

There is a chapter 9 verse 11 in the Koran,
but it doesn't seem to be particularly relevant
something about being nice to unbelievers who convert
not exactly what they were up to.

I wouldn't look to a historical date
I don't think the fact has been sufficiently stressed
these people were practitioners of some occult rite
(not exactly a new thing in the history of Islam)

I wish I had listened to that Bin Laden tape more carefully
there were quite a few references to dreams,
it is clear that dreams play a great role in their 'strategy'.

And that weird last testimony of Atta,
(shaving the body, etc.)
is it available somewhere on the web??

[Nogbad]

It is well-documented
that many of the hijackers did not follow strict Islamic lives.
Many of them drank alcohol.
Jarrah had lived with his girlfriend, in Germany.
They visited strip clubs and casinos.

Yes, but martyrs for the faith go to Heaven even if they led bad lives.

One of the side benefits of being a suicide terrorist,
you get to drink and fornicate all you want

[Mitchell]

Yes, but martyrs for the faith go to Heaven even if they led bad lives.
One of the side benefits of being a suicide terrorist, you get to drink and fornicate all you want

Well, that's the implication that everybody's taken from it, that they were just extraordinarily hypocritical, but I'm not so sure.

There was quite a bit of focus in the news on the alcohol and strip clubs and the like, because that's sensationalistic, but what I thought was the most telling was Ziad Jarrah living with his girlfriend in Germany. This wasn't something from the past, from before a conversion to fundamentalism; he telephoned her shortly before the hijackings.

I can certainly imagine these people engaging in vices that they believe to be utterly wrong, especially when under stress. People are led into temptation against their supposed best intentions quite frequently; they try, usually with some success, to keep such transgressions relatively secret, or at least isolated, limited, and erratic, separate from their normal lives.

But to live with one's girlfriend is to organize one's entire life in a way completely contrary to Islamic teachings. It is a declaration of non-adherence to fundamentalist beliefs, both publicly and privately.

So I conclude that Jarrah, at least, was not an Islamic religious fundamentalist. Since he was one of the operational leaders, that suggests that the others weren't either, or at least that Islamic fundamentalism wasn't the ideological foundation of the attack.

The most likely explanation is that the attack was organized by Iraq, not by al-Qaeda, although Saddam Hussein may have gotten some assistance from al-Qaeda in implementing it.

A second possibility is that al-Qaeda isn't really a fundamentalist group, that it's not based on strict adherence to Islam at all, in spite of bin Laden's public proclamations. (The trial of John Walker may be revealing in this regard.)

A final possibility is that the hijackers were working under stolen identities, and so, for example, the hijacker "Ziad Jarrah" is not the same person as the Ziad Jarrah with the girlfriend. The evidence would seem to be against this, however.

[Mitchell]

> are there any sightings of the hijackers meeting with known Al Qaeda operatives?

The closest that I know of can be derived from James Woods's recounting of his August 1, 2001 flight from Logan Airport to Los Angeles [foxnews.com] , the Flight 11 route. In what was clearly a dry run for the 9/11 hijackings, four Arabs acted suspiciously in first class, and there was a report filed with the FAA.

The really interesting thing was that Woods later positively identified two of the 9/11 hijackers on the plane that day--one who would be on flight 175, the other on Flight 77. This, I thought, was a vital bit of information, since it indicated that the hijackers from different flights worked closely together, and were not separated from each other in isolated cells.

But to return to your question, I would note that Woods said something else very interesting in that same transcript linked above. He said that a "higher" government official confirmed to him that the two Arabs he didn't identify as 9/11 hijackers were definitely "terrorist-involved." Which means that it's a fair assumption that we're talking about al-Qaeda.

I agree that Woods' statement is very interesting. (He came across well in his interview with O'Reilly.) But I don't think it tells us anything about whether the hijackers were with al-Qaeda or not.

It does show that they were part of one coherent group that worked closely together. It demonstrates that they planned the hijackings very carefully.

But I don't think it tells us whether "terrorist-involved" means al-Qaeda, or Iraqi, or Iranian, or something else. I interpreted the official's statement that the other two were "terrorist-involved" as meaning that they were, in fact, two of the other hijackers, but that that could not be confirmed officially since it was sensitive information. It's also possible that the other two were simply linked in their activities to Atta, et al. (someone like Moussaoui).

In any case, Woods' report doesn't reveal anything about the terrorists' origin.

[Mitchell]

Yes, the Battle of Vienna, ending the second siege by the Ottoman Empire of that city, is the only historically signficant and relevant event I could come up with for Sept. 11. (But it's normally dated Sept. 12.) This was the last time that the Muslim world threatened to conquer Christian Europe, but it turned into a complete disaster for the Ottoman Empire. [There is also the declaration of the British mandate in Palestine on Sept. 11, 1922, but that's relatively minor in comparison, and it's just one date in a whole series of dates leading up to the establishment of the state of Israel.]

I never understood though, why the Muslims would choose an anniversary based on the Western calendar. If they wanted to select an anniversary date, wouldn't it be in the Islamic calendar?

[Mitchell]

And that weird last testimony of Atta, (shaving the body, etc.) is it available somewhere on the web??

Are you thinking of the Arabic documents that were left behind by several of the hijackers (the various copies are quite similar)? The copy I've seen refers to: "Depleting the excess hair from the body and perfuming".

See this link. It includes both an English translation of one of these documents and an analysis of that document. The analysis makes it look even stranger than one's first impression. Here are photographs of one of these documents.

I don't think it's correct to describe this as a suicide note or as Atta's last testimony though (read the analysis in that first link). Or maybe there's another document you're thinking of?

[Mitchell]

All the possible dates for the attack have something to do with the number "19", and that's in either the Moslem or Western calendar systems!

Can you elaborate? (April 19 was the date of the Oklahoma City bombing, of course; this is generally attributed to its being the anniversary of the assault on the Branch Davidians in Waco.)

[Mitchell]

What about a possible Canada connection. The Ames strain is only known to have been given to 5 labs. The Ames strain used in the letters apparently was limited to only five labs - those are the US, Canada, and the UK. I'm looking for an article that mentioned the fact that Atta visited Canada often. Perhaps that's where the envelopes were stuffed.

I've not really seen much of a hint of a Canadian connection. (Porton Down in the UK has come under suspicion, however.)

One thing that occurs to me is that nobody knows why Atta and Alomari went to Portland, Maine, right before the hijackings, only flying into Boston first thing on the morning of 9/11. It must have been important, since it made their schedule very tight. What were they doing in Portland?

[Mitchell]

I wonder if Barbara Whasserface's source is a member of the official investigative team, so that we have a case of Duelling Leakers.

I don't think Barbara Rosenberg has a source at all.

[Nogbad]

The most likely explanation is that the attack was organized by Iraq, not by al-Qaeda,
although Saddam Hussein may have gotten some assistance from al-Qaeda in implementing it.

I find it difficult to believe that anyone would die for the sake of Saddam Hussein.

My experience of cult and religious fanatics is
that they generally are very mixed up people
who frequently live double lives.

I still am inclined to believe
that the 09-11 attack was the brainchild of Atta
who may have gone to Al-Qaeda and Iraq for financial and technical assistance.

[Nogbad]

What were they doing in Portland?

Atta probably had to confer with his successor
filling him in on the details of the post 09-11 operations.

[muawiyah]

OK, let's take a big step off the planet for a moment and take a look at the number "19".

Remember Ferrakhan's "Million Man March" several years back? He gave a sermon on the number "19". In fact, this business on "19" runs back centuries although I have not examined that aspec thoroughly, but someone undoubtedly could use the Net for that purpose.

We also have the Waco thing on the 19th, and the Murrah bombing on the 19th.

You will recall that throughout the investigation of the anthrax attack I have pointed repeatedly to the fact that there's somebody in the FBI who doesn't want anybody to make a clear and convincing connection of the attack to Mr. Atta and his friends.

We seem to have found such an individual in the identity of the Deputy Director at the FBI identified in the New York Times news article that precipitated this thread. He, of course, would have been in a position to "pick the date" for the Waco event, and possibly also for the "Murrah Building", if he were involved in somesort of deeper conspiracy.

OK, finished stepping off the planet?

Good, so am I!

That particular connection was made by dwelling on the number "19" all by itself. Actually, you have to focus on the whole date business and use some basic math. 9/11 and 11/9, as well as each written right to left as 1/19 and 11/9 would also be viable. The Homeland security folks gave us warnings on or about 11/9 and 1/19. Obviously someone there thinks 9/11 has meaning.

Then, we have the Moslem lunar calendar to look at. The same sort of dating analysis would give you other respectable "hit dates" for major events.

Homeland security also spoke up on those dates.

If you recall the problem with the Reverend Jim Jones down in former British Guiana, you would have instantly realized that he started out in Indianapolis, moved to San Fran, then moved as far East of Indianapolis as you can go, which takes you to Guiana in South America.

This sort of behavior, balancing geographically, or using number magic that begins with something already publicly known, e.g. "911", the standard emergency request number in most of the US, is fairly definitive of a type of schizophrenia. Combine that illness with bi-polar disorder, and maybe an homosexual predisposition, and you have your charismatic leader who will undoubtedly pick up a cadre of like-minded or confused people. That is, you have a crazy Mr. Atta and his band of killers, and they are not really any different than the Reverend Jones and his band of killers.

Osama Bin Laden most likely financed their operations, but there is a very good question about how much he knew of these people. This doesn't make him innocent since he was out there hiring murders to be done, but it makes him less than some sort of charismatic mastermind. Instead, he becomes nothing more than a murky figure with questionable morales and a pile of money. He pays for charisma.

On the other hand, there may be a number "19" fan in the FBI making serious recommendations, and he's still on the loose. Possibly he was Mr. Atta's "control" or his "date".