Replies

This is getting weirder all the time. I don't know about the other articles, but the Isikoff Newsweek article wasn't convincing. All it might have proved, although by broad language tried to "prove" more, is that one meeting might be mistaken. Assume true, so what? Weren't their others? How would the Czechs make up something like that so soon after 9/11? And who's disinformation game is it? And is it not about 9/11, but anthrax? Assuming supplied to Atta, where did it come from? Russian mob? Corrupt officials? Corrupt officials who sold germ stock to Iraq? etc. etc.

I will take Safire's article for telling that "something's up", but I don't know where he gets his conclusions. Someone's hiding something. Maybe the Bush Admin./Justice Department was getting close to developing the history of Anthrax (or something else) and someone didn't like it. Notice Safire's comments about sources in the Admin. starting to believe it.

Be no surprise that Atta was in the Czech Republic. Czech's provided the Semtex used to bring down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie. It was also used in the 1998 US Embassy in Kenya. Czech's sold tons of the stuff to everyone from Qaddafi to Syria, Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

"This is getting weirder all the time."

You can say that again.

"And is it not about 9/11, but anthrax?"

I started to post "If it's about Atta, it's about 9/11". Which forced me to consider this insight: Why would Atta, responsible for leading a mission that was meticulously planned and required intensive preparation, get involved in an entirely separate and, essentially, unrelated scheme that had its own planning and preparation requirements?

Wouldn't this be a violation of "tradecraft" -- operational overload? If you were running the entire operation, would you trust a single operative to be in charge of and execute both?

Shouldn't we consider that either a.) Atta had a "controller" in the USA, who also ran the anthrax operation on a parallel basis, and/or b.) Atta was meeting with al-Ani solely concerning the WTC mission?

Anthrax doesn't necessarily have to be the reason Atta met with al-Ani.

Help me with this.

Has anybody ever seen a story about Mohammed Atta training in the Al-Quaeda camps? Maybe I've missed it.

But isn't it possible HE was Sadaam's man?

That HE went to Osama and asked for recruits from the camps?

And isn't is possible, given the fact we know one South Florida pharmacist claims he showed up asking for medication for his red hands, that Atta got the anthrax from Saddam, wrote the anthrax notes and envelopes himself, got someone else to mail them from New Jersey?

Didn't some of the other 19 hijackers have roots in New Jersey?

Why haven't they struck again?

Have we ever seen samples of Atta's handwriting in English?

Just some thoughts. But, whatever the truth, of course the Bush adminstration wants to cover it up, and stop the MADness.