Saddam and the Next 9/11

The Wall Street Journal | 14 February 2003 | Editorial Board

[genefromjersey]

I've been reading a new book : CELL ( 3 authors listed, non-fiction, "New Books" section of library ), and there is mention of Iraqi and AlQaeda terrorists sharing the same training camps. There is also some indication of peripheral Iraqi involvement in the 1st WTC bombing, and in 9-11; however, the known involvement of Iraqis appears to be less than the involvement of our own Black Muslim splinter groups.

I stress the word " appears " because there are huge gaps in what the government knows; and no way for us, who only get to see such bits and pieces of "the elephant" as the government and the media want , to have hard evidence to judge.

[aristeides]

For the WSJ editorial staff, it's personal. They knew a lot of people who were killed on 9/11.

[Petronski]

Unlike France, which seems to be uniformly perfidious in their devotion to Saddamatry, there is some hope in Germany.

If you like the WSJ item you've just read, you'll love this WSJ Europe item about the CDU leader's brutal criticism of Schröder's foolishness.

[iceskater]

bump

[Peach]

Great book recommendation; I'll check it out. We need to start a book reading club at FR.

[Fred Mertz]

Saddam goes so far as to assert that U.S. officials are lying about anthrax because if frightened Americans thought the source was bin Laden they'd force the Bush Administration to stop hunting him down.

That's a plausible deduction.

[Fred Mertz]

Saddam goes so far as to assert that U.S. officials are lying about anthrax because if frightened Americans thought the source was bin Laden they'd force the Bush Administration to stop hunting him down.

That's a plausible deduction.

[FairWitness]

What our readers should understand is that the rulers in Iraq have also long admired the methods of bin Laden and other anti-American terrorists, going back before September 11, 2001.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" - I have never been convinced by the folks who say that Iraq and Bin Laden can't cooperate because of religious differences.

[The Great Satan]

Saddam goes so far as to assert that U.S. officials are lying about anthrax because if frightened Americans thought the source was bin Laden they'd force the Bush Administration to stop hunting him down.

[Your comment] That's a plausible deduction.

Except for one thing. We went after bin Laden with all guns blazing. It's Iraq that we haven't hit, eighteen months after the attacks on New York and Washington, even though Bush and Cheney clearly believe Saddam was the ultimate author of those attacks (see, for instance, these collected quotes from Bush at War). But bin Laden never was that important -- he was just a guy who made recruitment videos. For both the United States and Iraq, the über-terrorist Osama Bin Laden is a convenient myth, a myth which is perfectly symbolized by the fiction of his James Bond-style mountain fortress.

Do you see the game both sides are playing here? It's the same game.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads up!

[Wolfstar]

The WSJ editorial claims: "We now know that the first U.S. anthrax letters were sent on September 18."

I don't know how the WSJ can make such a declarative statement. The first anthrax letter was the one sent to American Media in Florida. It was never recovered, having been discarded before anyone began showing symptoms. For this reason, when it was sent cannot be known.

Recall those horrible days and weeks immediately after 9/11 when the entire nation expected to be hit again at any moment. My personal reaction during that time was to focus like a laser on the then-developing anthrax attacks. I collected every article I could and began building a timeline of the attacks with the intention of posting it here on FR. But anthrax news was breaking almost every day back then, so I kept delaying the posting of information I collected, which was stored on my PC at work, an older machine that was due to be swapped out early in 2002. Unfortunately, I waited too long: the hard drive on that PC crashed. By that time, there was no way to recover all the info I had collected about the anthrax timeline without buying a Lexis-Nexis subscription.

My point is this: the early reporting on the anthrax attacks is burned into my memory. I cannot emphasize enough the fact that AT THE TIME, when their memories were most fresh as to details, American Media personnel said the peculiar letter with the strange brownish-white powder arrived the week of September 8, 2001. (In that year, September 8 was a Saturday.)

In plain English: Based on best evidence, which is contemporaneous statements by the people involved — who, at the time, had every reason to be as accurate as possible in every detail since they believed their own lives were in danger — the first anthrax attack letter was mailed a few days before the September 11, 2001 hijackings. Best evidence also indicates it was mailed in South Florida, since some local postal facilities were contaminated.

Also in plain English: Real, substantive evidence places Atta and several other hijackers in the same vicinity as the American Media building in the build-up period prior to the attacks. Real, substantive evidence has two of Atta's gang being treated for severe skin problems: one for a lesion the doctor who treated him later said was cutaneous anthrax. Real, substantive evidence has Atta checking out crop dusters in the same vicinity. Real, substantive evidence has one or more hijackers taking flying lessons in the same vicinity.

If it waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, and smells like a duck, it sure as hell isn't the all-too-convenient mad scientist stereotype of ancient Hollywood melodramas!!!!

I understand the cat-and-mouse game the Administration has played over the past 17 months. What I don't get — and may I say what is beginning to infuriate me — is why so many in the Democrat Party, in our media, as well as supposed allies like France and Germany, insist on pretending that the Administration is nothing but a bunch of wild-eyed warmongers. These people would have us believe that Saddam Hussein is a pussycat, while Bush, Blair, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and others of their stature are the real danger. Oh, and just in case Hussein is not a pussycat, but a tiger, they want you, and me, and hundreds of millions of Americans, Brits, Australians, and other hated "infidels" to rely on "containment."

CONTAINMENT!!! [screeching here at the top of my lungs; this morning's UN dog-and-pony show was about it for me] Containment...containment: this in a time when poisons that can kill millions can be smuggled in a two-inch vial or an ordinary aerosol can.

[Allan]

More names. My apologies to those already pinged.

[swarthyguy]

>Is it practical?

Completely practical. But hasn't been done since Afghanistan was secured last year. For political reasons.

This issue is, is the population there only 50% for him, or over 90%? It'd be a a long messy affair, either way.

[tallhappy]

Thanks for pinging me. I heard about this article and wanted to read it.

[Nita Nuprez]

Do you see the game both sides are playing here? It's the same game.

No, I don't, and I don't have time to read the whole thread to figure out what you're talking about. Be a peach and give us the version, will you? I won't be back until tomorrow or Sunday, so just ping me if you make a post between now and then that gives the Cliffs Notes summary instead of ending with one of those irritating "Don't-you-see-it?" questions.

If I didn't think your opinion was interesting and well worth reading, I wouldn't have asked, so don't get mad. If you don't feel like summarizing, I'm sure you won't. :-)

[Nita Nuprez]

Or more succinctly...

The blonde doesn't get it. You have to spell it out for her.

[The Great Satan]

Iraq is blackmailing the US with its anthrax. The blackmail says: point the finger for 9-11, and you will have no choice but war -- and if you go to war, we will hurt you like you have never been hurt before. This situation is essentially a reprise of 1991, but played out on an intercontinental scale, for even higher stakes.

In his open letter, Saddam claims the United States made up the story about domestic source for the anthrax because, if we confronted the truth that it came from the 9-11 terrorists, our leaders would have to admit being too frightened to retaliate. This is a true statement. The rightwing domestic terrorist theory is patently a cover story -- it was floated by Bob Woodward in the Washington Post ten days after an NSC meeting in which Cheney and Tenet agreed that (a) the anthrax came from 9-11's state sponsor, (b) we weren't ready to do anything about it, and (c) this assessment had to be kept from the public (click on my profile for details). So Saddam is taunting the US here. Obviously, he's not going to say openly that he was behind the anthrax -- "Bin Laden" is the code word that his Arab audience understand perfectly well. And of course, Al-Qaeda doesn't have the anthrax -- if they did, they wouldn't be sending shoe bombers to hit us, that's for sure.

But, just as Saddam can only hint at his authorship of 9-11 and his successful intimidation of the West with his WMD, Bush can only hint at Iraq's role in 9-11. As soon as Bush makes it "official" that Iraq was the author of 9-11, it becomes perfectly clear to everyone that we are being deterred by Saddam's anthrax, and that, sooner or later, this is likely to end in a terrible war, fought with WMDs. So Bush talks up this mythical uber-terrorist, Osama bin Laden (in reality, bin Laden was actually little more than an informercial host) and he keeps the role of Saddam ambiguous while he tries to lead us all out of this fix.

If bin Laden didn't exist, both sides in this conflict -- blackmailer and victim -- would have to invent him. And, in a sense, that's just what they did.

[bonfire]

satan, you need to copy this so you don't have to rewrite it countless times each day!

[Lion's Cub]

fyi

[Allan]

satan, you need to copy this so you don't have to rewrite it countless times each day

Ah! But he does rewrite it countless times each day!