Anthrax Terror [CIA Building Case 2001 Anthrax Attacks were Terrorism]

The Washington Times ^ | 12-26-03 | Gertz/Scarborough

[Shermy]

I suppose, or these writers have been making calls in light of renewed interest in the case.

The CIA has been quietly building a case that the anthrax attacks of 2001 were in fact the result of an international terrorist plot.

"Quietly"...seems a journalistic invention here, or a code word? Gives the story a storyline of sorts, and unfortunately reminiscent of the Risen NYTimes piece last year how Havel "quietly" informed Bush there was no Prague/Atta meeting...that piece of disinformation was rapidly disposed.

The article mentions "milled" but not the findings of Matsumoto's article, so the writers are FReeper like afficiandos. :)

As for the CIA, I suppose the threat of turning over the investigation to them, or another agency other than the FBI is inferrable from the event of mid-2002, around the time of the Van Harp/BHRosenberg/Senate staffers meeting...immediately thereafter came the very publicized Hatfill exposure. I think, and have opined here, that the "mad (lone) scientist" theory came from 1. "profiling" that relied on prior hoaxers, 2. people with an agenda, hoping it was an American, 3. dictated by economic interests - seeking to soothe the public with the "he won't strike again, he actually just wants to warn us" theory. Hatfill, to the degree he fit the patsy potential, wasn't, IMO, part of a strategy, but an anomaly that popped up, that the FBI wasn't interested in framing him, but due to the pressure of the Senators who wanted results, and informed by BHR's (others?) "profile" which filtered into the "respectable" press (remember Mr. Z?), the FBI, for bureaucratic turf and other reasons, wanted to seem like they were taking action. Which is why they made it public. Or they were forced by higher ups in the Justice Dept. convinced by the BHR oeuvre.

I can't forget an early Ashcroft TV appearance, seemingly assured that an arrest (Hatfill) would be made, seemingly reliant on three or four smug-like lawyers standing behind him. Hatfill's public speech quieted them quickly. But hey, many have been fooled by the BHR thesis...and were other "respected" scientists playing along? BHR mentioned, not by name, 3 or 4. (To some degree BHR was responding to the FBI's "lone scientist" profile.)

< /ramble> As for this article, is the intended audience the Senate? All very interesting...I'm getting some popcorn.

[Mitchell]

"Quietly"...seems a journalistic invention here, or a code word?

I suspect that "quietly" here may mean that the report is single-sourced, or, if there's more than one source, that the sources are very closely linked.

[Age of Reason]

To me, it was pretty plainly a desperate attempt to try to intimidate us into not responding militarily to 9/11.

Was what the letters said?

[Shermy]

IMO, the description of the letters as being warnings from someone who cares about us isn't too convincing (though not impossible).

One could say, why didn't the first letter mention anthrax? Simple enough, and just like any numerous hoaxers in the past.

Why mention "penacilin?" If a terrorist, why wouldn't he/they give a hint? They want the disease to be linked with their message, else the letter would be likely disregraded like any other kook mail.

Why not a mass attack? Maybe the "terrorist" didn't have a lot of the stuff. Or read "Vector". Why AMI? Why the NY Post and not the NYTimes?

< /shrugging shoulders>

[Shermy]

Another thought..."quietly" means in comparison to the past hoo-haa of the Hatfill operation.

[Southack]

"The leasing agent (Bob Stevens wife) for Atta and partner's condo has always been too coinicdental for me. That the first letter would be mailed to him and kill him is just too suspicious. Add in Atta's visit to the pharmacy with a red rash on his hands just days before he left for his deadly mission is another too coincidental thing. I still believe they were responsible and probably had someone else mail the letters."

The wife of the Sun's editor was the landlord to at least two of the 9/11 terrorists. This is no coincidence. What you have to remember is that *MOST* of the people who contracted anthrax got it when their own innocent mail was cross-contaminated with the anthrax letters as the envelopes touched each other in various post offices. This is why entire post offices had to be shut down. They weren't the target of the anthrax letters, but their mail got contaminated by the anthrax letters going to those targets.

Well, just as those anthrax letters contaminated other mail that they came into contact with while they were being mailed, the anthrax letters would *also* contaminate other letters being mailed by the terrorists, such as those to pay rent to their landlords. And those letters to their landlords would have likewise contaminated other mail, so it's easy to see how two people at the Sun's office got infected.

Contrary to the spin put forth by the "blame the right wing white guy" crowd, the Sun was not the intended target. The Sun didn't get a letter saying "We have this anthrax, you die now" like everybody else, and also take note that the actual anthrax targets were all in NYC and Washington, D.C., not Florida.

No, the Florida anthrax attack was an accident due to cross-contamination. The Sun's editor had his wife working as a landlord, and her mail got contaminated when the terrorists had to pay their rent to her.

No other theory explains how and why the Sun got hit in the manner that it did, but my theory above clearly shows a direct contamination trail from the terrorists to their landlord to the Sun's office.

They had to pay their rent, and the anthrax cross-contaminated their correspondence.

[meenie]

Hatfill has filed suit for slander. A defense against slander is a public pronouncement insinuating you were wrong and have a new suspect in view. Everything then is just a mistake and an unfortunate happening that has been rectified by publicly declaring it has to be someone else. This in nothing but a CYA statement by the FBI and CIA.

[keri]

Thanks for the ping. (Finally, something of interest)

[ElkGroveDan]

But a bilingual Russian would be unlikely to confuse English and Cyrillic characters. This appeared to be someone's attempt to make his writing look Russian, or at least foreign. The same went for the block letters, which Russian adults don't use.

People learning to write for the first time (such as children) often print their N's, Z's, 5's and 2's backwards. I suspect foreigners who only know how to write in Arabic squiggles would do that too. Any language profs here to answer that?

[aristeides]

I suspect, too, that there were standing orders in the FBI during the clinton years that they must never permit any public recognition of Islamic terrorism, because it would be politically unproductive. The TWA 800 case is the most prominent example of such standing orders at the highest level.

If, as I suspect, OKC is another case of this, there would be h*** to pay if the truth came out. Meaning it's dangerous to admit other cases.

[aristeides]

Well, if the CIA is behind this leak, that's interesting. Because, as you know, the strongest denials of the Prague meeting have come from the CIA.

[aristeides]

Wouldn't three or four lawyers sharp enough to be appointed to high DOJ posts be sharp enough to detect such obvious BS? (says me, a lawyer)

[aristeides]

I'd be surprised if that were an effective defense against Hatfill, as the tactics used against him are unexampled, as far as I know.

[cgk]

Northeast Network was mentioned several times on this thread... several times at least from this post onwards... As far as we know it was talking about these threats before the main media.

[aristeides]

Linking to the later thread on this article.

[Nick Danger]

No other theory explains how and why the Sun got hit in the manner that it did

There is one other idea, and it is that these guys were sufficiently ignorant about the American media that when they saw a building that said "American Media" right on it, they thought they'd found the mother lode, and attacked.

[okie01]

I don't think this article is particluarly informative...except to signal a contrary article will soon appear in Newsweek, WashPost or NYTimes attributing the idea to "neo-cons".

This piece sounds a lot like Gertz's CIA sources firing back at Isikoff's FBI sources.

"Did not. Did, too. Did not. Did, too. Etc..."

[Nick Danger]

The person who used this anthrax could have killed thousands, but did not. Why?

Remember a Freeper who called himself The Great Satan? He seems to have gotten himself banned. But while he was here he pushed the idea that Bush would never go after Saddam Hussein because we did know where the anthrax came from, and it was him. And the message was, "Come after me, and you get this."

Suppose that guy was right, and we are about to find out where the WMD's went. They're here. And the capture of Saddam Hussein is the event that sets off some doomsday plan he cooked up. He is evil enough to have planned such a thing; he had the money to make it happen; and the Atta Boys would have been happy to serve as the deliverymen.

I hope that's not it.