Posted on 05/04/2007 3:18:46 PM PDT by TrebleRebel
I know both you and the FBI have compiled numerous facts
since then to support your “domestic” theories, but do
not be reassured by same. That was the same fatal mistake
that General Rahl made at Trenton. All of his intel sources
were telling him that Washington’s main army was in total
disarray and disintegrating across the Delaware river in
Pennsylvania. There was next to no chance of his position
being attacked during the Christmas Holidays.
I still maintain that the Bureau went astray in the third
week of October, 2001, when the profilers started to point
to a domestic perp at the expense of a more “open minded”
approach....JJ61
True. But that certainly also applies to al Qaeda, unless you change the rules when referring to your own theories. People can always argue that the FBI hasn't found proof that "suspect-X" did it because they haven't looked hard enough or haven't looked in the right places - regardless of who "suspect-X" is.
That is your argument after all for excluding Al Qaeda in this case.
That is NOT true.
I do not "exclude" al Qaeda. I just say the evidence shows that al Qaeda was almost certainly NOT behind the anthrax attacks. If you search and search and search and search and find nothing, you may say that means they just haven't searched in the right places, but unless you can state where the "right places" are, such fruitless searches ARE evidence that a great effort was made to find proof and nothing was found.
Here's a short list of the "evidence" which says al Qaeda did NOT send the anthrax letters:
1. The 9/11 hijackers were all DEAD at the time of the anthrax attacks.
2. No anthrax was found anywhere they went.
3. No al Qaeda member was ever found in the U.S. who possessed anthrax.
4. No connection of any kind has ever been found between the attacks and al Qaeda.
5. The letters show evidence that al Qaeda was NOT behind the attacks:
5.a. The letters contain medical advice to help the recipients avoid infection, which does not fit with al Qaeda terrorist actions.
5.b. The letters show that precautions were taken to minimize damage, which does not fit al Qaeda's terrorist actions.
5.c. There was no followup attack.
5.d. There was enough anthrax in the letters to kill hundreds, if not thousands, yet the actual deaths appear to have been unintentional.
5.e. Typical al Qaeda letters contain some passages in Arabic, which the letters didn't have.
6. No evidence has been found that al Qaeda had the Ames strain.
7. There were at least 2 different grades of powder involved, which is inconsistent with preparing the powder overseas somewhere and transporting it to the U.S.
8. There is an NBC report that the powder was made using water from the Northeastern U.S.
9. There were dozens of targets which would have made sense for al Qaeda to attack before getting to liberal Senators Daschle and Leahy.
10. It's a near certainty that the second (sophisticated) powder was made after the first (crude) powder failed to alarm anyone. And it was almost certainly made somewhere in Central New Jersey.
11. The return address on the Senate letters appears to have been deliberately scrambled to eliminate any chance that the anthrax-filled letters might be returned to some REAL school. It does not seem logical that a terrorist organization like al Qaeda would even bother to take such precautions.
12. The whole anthrax letter episode shows that a lot of precautions were taken to avoid harming anyone, which makes no sense for al Qaeda just after they killed THOUSANDS of men, women and children on 9/11. Terrorist tactics are generally to hit hard, and then to hit HARDER.
As we've seen in other threads about this subject, people can always rationalize screwball ways that it might still have been al Qaeda. If that's what you want to believe, you are free to believe it. But you should be aware that such a belief is NOT supported by the facts. Such a belief goes CONTRARY to the facts.
Jersey John,
Given the public pronouncements by the FBI that its investigation has spanned 6 out of 7 continents — and recently included searches in Afghanistan etc. — your suggestion that they excluded Al Qaeda has no basis. Indeed, they have always said that fully one of the two squads is focused on an Al Qaeda theory.
The other squad now focuses mainly on US-based supporters of the militant islamists.
http://www.anthraxandalqaeda.com
I should have written:
1. The 9/11 hijackers were all DEAD for a week at the time of the first anthrax mailing and DEAD for a MONTH at the time of the second anthrax mailing.
I momentarily forgot there are people here who believe that the 9/11 terrorists simply dropped the letters into mailboxes on their way to the airport (plus there is at least one person who believes the letters were mailed in Florida and somehow magically got sorted out and entered the postal system in such a way as to APPEAR that they were mailed at two different times in New Jersey).
Here are some articles indicating that the FBI disagrees with Ed.
The FBI and DOJ has indicated that they expect a resolution to the matter in the relatively near future.
Princeton Packet, NJ - Apr 13, 2007
According to the letter, the investigation has spanned six continents,
Washington Post - Sep 16, 2005
In November, on additional information, agents spent weeks searching an area In the Kandahar mountains, several hundred miles outside of Kabul, ...
The articles indicate no such thing.
The fact that the FBI is hunting for al Qaeda and looking for anything that might indicate that al Qaeda is developing bioweapons may just show that they are trying to keep America safe from some FUTURE attack. And/or it may indicate they are looking at ALL possibilities in the Amerithrax investigation. Either way, it certainly doesn't dispute my analysis. As long as they haven't arrested the culprit, they MUST continue looking at all possiblities -- otherwise they will be accused of not doing a thorough investigation when they DO make an arrest.
On the other hand, it seems that one of you two guys is totally wrong -- if not both of you.
In message #20 in this thread, you wrote:
Here are some recent anthrax articles that address the facts supporting an Al Qaeda theory, which by the way is the theory credited by the FBI.
In message #22, JerseyJohn61 writes:
It is my belief that both the Bureau and yourself did a premature preclusion of Al Qaeda because of seemly having no early HOT leads to that organization.
So, we've got one guy saying the FBI believes in "the al Qaeda theory" while the other guy says that the FBI is ignoring "the al Qaeda theory."
And apparently BOTH of you believe in "the al Qaeda theory," even though it is not supported by the facts. Ignoring facts seems to be what you both have in common.
I find that interesting.
Let’s take ragrugs infomration, for example.
We know that 3 postal inspectors flew out Midwest to see her, driving something like 5 hours from the airport.
They told her that there was a great deal that was being kept from the public but that there was no “cover up.”
She was urging a potential lead as to an Al Qaeda theory.
John, note also that the former CIA Director Tenet said that Ramzi Bin Al-Shibh was involved in CBRN. He was the planner who sent $14,000 to Moussaoui, whose code name was “Sally.” Previously, it only had been known that 9/11 planner KSM was involved (and we had reason to think his involvement might not have started until Atef’s death). And so in the event you have a potential lead relating to NJ-based hijackers, who knows, maybe the FBI credits it but just hasn’t disclosed the fact. Whatever they are doing, they seem to be doing it with great stealth, which no doubt is a good thing.
What Director Mueller hinted on this subject was:
“Think 9/11. Think Oklahoma City.”
Take it from a voice of experience, Al Qaeda in central
Jersey has not been fully investigated....JJ61
John,
You and I have corresponded privately on this.
Consider that if you think you have eyewitness observation — and the observation sounds perfectly credible to me, and certainly very dramatic — that an eyewitness account is superfluous to something like travel records.
By the time they received your report, they may very well already have obtained independent corroboration from such things as telephone records or travel records. There would be a very sound reason to keep that information confidential.
So while i don’t know whether it is true or not, it may very well be — and they just likely have objective evidence bearing on the subject, and very possibly confirming it.
But the best way to play the Amerithrax hand — whatever the theory - is for them not to reveal what they know. There’s not any reason to think they have not been exhaustive in their investigation.
1)Dead the 9/11 hijackers were. Does that mean that AQ
had no other operatives in this country post 9/11?
2)No anthrax was found anywhere that the hijackers were
KNOWN to have visited.
3)No AQ member ever found with ‘thrax in U.S.- After we
dropped the 2 a-bombs on Japan, we were temporarily out
of stock too. B-17s and 29s would drop their loads and fly
home also.
4)Trite statemant-An Anthrax-like lesion on the leg of
a hijacker is conveniently down played. Before anyone can
tell us with certainty what it wasn’t, they ‘d better be
damn near certain of what it was and why it can't be what it wasn't. Double Neg intended.
5)Too broad of a statement to even warrant a comment.
5a)Cipro would be much more appropriate to “prescribe”
than “Penacilin”. And forget the “dumb down” theory
to disguise the perp’s expertise. The Bureau Dumbed
themselves down with that one.
5b)Precautions? What?! Pharm Folds? Maybe they were trying
to make it easier on themselves.
5c) Ahhh. When last I checked, there had been no follow
ups to the 9/11 attacks either. See also # 3.
5d) “Appear” being the operative here.
5e) How many letters has AQ sent to the American people
as PUBLICLY as this one would have been sent? Bin Laden
lied about AQ’s involvement in 9/11 and AQ is laughing at
us right now about the ‘thrax ‘tacks.
6) You have no evidence that I’m wearing a blue shirt
right now, but I am. AQ had an active ‘thrax program and
and the Ames strain is now KNOWN to have been much more
widely distributed than previously realized.
7) Operatives may very well have produced the attack ‘thrax
here domestically. A very small seed stock would be all
that was required to create small batches in an
unsophisticated lab set up. More knowhow was required
than hardware. MADE IN THE U.S.A...Would be easier to
sneak in as a minuscule amount anyway.
8) See #7
9)The targets were THE UNITED STATES SENATE and two
AMERICAN senators. Because of Iraq, AQ has only lately
started to differentiate between parties and warm up to
liberal Democrats.
10) Why would either condition be a near certainty???
11) A hypothetical concept built on an assumption.
Certainly possible, but a reach, and that is exactly
what you chide others for doing.
12) Virulently lethal bacteria is sent through the mail
and you speak of precautions. Would a deluded, but
“well-intended” domestic expert send such material
in the mail and truly believe that the public at large
could be safe? Perhaps; but I would mull this over in
your mind. The Una-bomber did, but that nut was found
living in a cabin in the deeeep woods and not in a
Jersey suburb.
You mentioned the word “fruitless” earlier about searching
for evidence. Fruitless pretty much sums up the case as
far as the FBI is concerned. Yes that got one big lesson
in Microbiology, and you may argue that this was the perp’s
intent, but “show us the money”. The scent of Blarney was
recently detected around Capitol Hill....JJ61
Under-investigatiing the backyard is the problem in this
case. Late last year, a brief clip on FOX News
claimed that the FBI was rehashing and investigating
ALL its’ earlier leads in this case. Funny thing because
my phone did not ring....JJ61
P.S. Ed Lake, despite my ever growing sharp tongue toward
you; I am still a fan of all the relentless research you
have done and the chaff that you have separated from the
wheat. It’s the bread you bake from that flour that I
differ GREATLY with. You bake WHITE while others
make PITA. You then accuse the Pita makers of using
yeast to “puff up” their product....JJ61
I know that the Bureau will not “backwash” info.
That I would not expect or wish if all the facts
had been heard. INTAKE is what should be expected.
Post 9/11 was awful for the Bureau as they had
to clean up the mess the Intel Agencies had left...
For the last five and a half plus years, I have been
miserable as well because of what I have witnessed.
Listen all or run the risk of never knowing the cause
of the case...yeah , more trouble will be coming....JJ61
How is that a suggestion that al Queada wasn't involved?
No al Qaeda member had ever flown an airliner into a building before either.
JJ,
Take Zacarias Moussaoui as an example. On about September 18, as I recall, they executed a warrant to search his email on a Colorado ISP, I think, relating to an email account set up for him by anthrax lab director Yazid Sufaat. It was called “greenlab@usa.net” We didn’t learn of it until years later. They also had in custody a guy who drove him to Minnesota that summer. They had his laptop etc. Indeed, Moussaoui was on Tenet’s mind (see Chris Matthews interview) at breakfast on 9/11. Now events prior to 9/11 show that the FBI and CIA seriously screwed up. The FBI should have known that under FISA, they could get a warrant to search his laptop based on his connection to Ibn Khattab, without more, because Khattab was closely connected to OBL. There’s a great email from FBI Special Agent Harry Samit to a colleague lamenting that HQ wouldn’t approve a warrant — he said he was desperate to get into the computer... and God help them all if there is an attack using the same kind of large plane. The email was dated September 10. Moreover, the FBI’s failure to locate the two hijackers at the January 2000 planning meeting at Sufaat’s condo — I believe one or both was in the phonebook — was outrageous. This is not in the context of business as usual. This is at a time when Tenet says the system was blinking red all over the place and they had definite information that there was going to be multiple spectacular attacks. Tenet put down his fork at breakfast with Boren — and knew that is was definitely Al Qaeda. No purpose is served in not discussing what you think you saw given the specifics and the context. That is, so long as your observation relates to hijackers who were dead, dead, dead, to borrow Ed’s phrase, or at least to plotters were are in jail, jail, jail. 6 years is quite long enough. Then someone could contact others who might be able to corroborate it. The perps don’t need any incentive to concoct alibis, intimidate witnesses etc. (That was Director Mueller’s reason not to brief Congress). Note that the CIA publicly concluded that Moussaoui’s inquiries about cropdusters likely related to a contemplated use of weaponized anthrax. So you have the CIA linking Sufaat (providing logistical support to ZM) and Ramzi (also providing logistical support to ZM at KSM’s direction) linked to CBRN/anthrax. That should be as good an invitation as any one needs to take your information seriously.
JJ,
Take Zacarias Moussaoui as an example. On about September 18, as I recall, they executed a warrant to search his email on a Colorado ISP, I think, relating to an email account set up for him by anthrax lab director Yazid Sufaat. It was called “greenlab@usa.net” We didn’t learn of it until years later. They also had in custody a guy who drove him to Minnesota that summer. They had his laptop etc. Indeed, Moussaoui was on Tenet’s mind (see Chris Matthews interview) at breakfast on 9/11. Now events prior to 9/11 show that the FBI and CIA seriously screwed up. The FBI should have known that under FISA, they could get a warrant to search his laptop based on his connection to Ibn Khattab, without more, because Khattab was closely connected to OBL. There’s a great email from FBI Special Agent Harry Samit to a colleague lamenting that HQ wouldn’t approve a warrant — he said he was desperate to get into the computer... and God help them all if there is an attack using the same kind of large plane. The email was dated September 10. Moreover, the FBI’s failure to locate the two hijackers at the January 2000 planning meeting at Sufaat’s condo — I believe one or both was in the phonebook — was outrageous. This is not in the context of business as usual. This is at a time when Tenet says the system was blinking red all over the place and they had definite information that there was going to be multiple spectacular attacks. Tenet put down his fork at breakfast with Boren — and knew that is was definitely Al Qaeda. No purpose is served in not discussing what you think you saw given the specifics and the context. That is, so long as your observation relates to hijackers who were dead, dead, dead, to borrow Ed’s phrase, or at least to plotters were are in jail, jail, jail. 6 years is quite long enough. Then someone could contact others who might be able to corroborate it. The perps don’t need any incentive to concoct alibis, intimidate witnesses etc. (That was Director Mueller’s reason not to brief Congress). Note that the CIA publicly concluded that Moussaoui’s inquiries about cropdusters likely related to a contemplated use of weaponized anthrax. So you have the CIA linking Sufaat (providing logistical support to ZM) and Ramzi (also providing logistical support to ZM at KSM’s direction) linked to CBRN/anthrax. That should be as good an invitation as any one needs to take your information seriously.
Jerzey, here is another pass at Ed’s list.
“1. The 9/11 hijackers were all DEAD at the time of the anthrax attacks.”
True. And we know that numerous AQ operatives who were in the country (some of whom had contact with them). They are at large and are hotly sought by the FBI or now are in custody. The names of such operatives never pass Ed’s lips and so he’s not in a posiiton to discuss men like Jdey, al-Marabh, Elzahabi etc.
“2. No anthrax was found anywhere they went.”
This is not true. A hijacker had a blackened leg lesion upon arriving from kandahar, the location of Sufaat’s lab. Extremely virulent anthrax was found at a house in Kandahar in autumn 2003, upon the harsh interrogation of Hambali. Ed just has not updated his page to drop this point and note the anthrax found at the location from where the hijacker with the leg lesion had come.
Ed writes: “3. No al Qaeda member was ever found in the U.S. who possessed anthrax.”
See #2 above alluding to the medical evidence tying the hijacker with the leg lesion to anthrax. FBI Director Mueller has said for the record that no one is dismissing the report. At the time he said they could not find any anthrax. Now we have an update relating to Kandahar.
“4. No connection of any kind has ever been found between the attacks and al Qaeda.”
Heck, you don’t have to go past the message in the letters to find a connection to Al Qaeda.
Ed writes: “5. The letters show evidence that al Qaeda was NOT behind the attacks:
5.a. The letters contain medical advice to help the recipients avoid infection, which does not fit with al Qaeda terrorist actions.”
Ed is not at all familiar with the documentary and other evidence that shows that operatives like CBRN operative Ramzi are governed by precise rules relating to CBRN. For example, KSM noted the one about killing children. Others have noted the requirement of a warning. At the time of 9/11, there was no “legal” opinion permitting the mass use of CBRN. That did not occur until later. There is much learning on this question of the fiqh of warfare.
“5.b. The letters show that precautions were taken to minimize damage, which does not fit al Qaeda’s terrorist actions.”
The letters fit the modus operandi of lethal letters to newspapers in DC and NYC and people in symbolic positions in January 1997 relating to the detention of the blind sheik and WTC 1993 plotters.
“5.c. There was no followup attack.”
Atef was killed. Sufaat was arrested. Rauf Ahmad was picked up. Saeed Mohammed was picked up. Barq and Wahdan, two anthrax tech reps, were captured in 2003. etc. 8 years passed before the follow-up attack on the WTC.
“5.d. There was enough anthrax in the letters to kill hundreds, if not thousands, yet the actual deaths appear to have been unintentional.”
The modus oeprandi was exactly the MO used earlier in the year that led to the February 2001 PDB involving CBRN. It was a tri-folded letter regarding the detention of the manager of Bin Laden’s farm in Sudan. He was an EIJ shura member. His bail was denied on October 5, 2001 and then the “real deal” was immediatley mailed. A report on the effectiveness of mailed anthrax was published in September 2001. It showed that the simulant leaked out of the envelope and that when opened, the product immediately dispersed throughout the room. Ali Al-Ames researcher Bailey. Did they see a copy of the September 2001 report on the Canadian study?
“5.e. Typical al Qaeda letters contain some passages in Arabic, which the letters didn’t have.”
The al-Hayat letters did not contain Arabic. They contained a Christmas greeting.
“6. No evidence has been found that al Qaeda had the Ames strain.”
Evidence has shown that OBL operatives linked to a willingness to attack the US with anthrax had daily access to US Army strains. For example, one operative, Aafia Siddiqui, married KSM’s successor. She had daily access to Vollum at Brandeis’s Volen complex. Another supporter of the Taliban, who worked closely with OBL’s sheik, had access to the facilities at ATCC (ATCC does not deny it had Ames in its patent repository as distinguished from its online catalog) and the GMU Center for Biodefense. He worked near the most prolific Ames researcher in the country, the former USAMRIID head.
“7. There were at least 2 different grades of powder involved, which is inconsistent with preparing the powder overseas somewhere and transporting it to the U.S.”
The isotope ratios point to a culture medium in the Northeastern US.
“8. There is an NBC report that the powder was made using water from the Northeastern U.S.”
There is reason to credit the NBC report. The actual isotope map excludes NJ and Ohio. Thus we know Ed’s theory can be ruled out. The actual swath of numbers in that range is in Northeastern US but also a ribbon-like swath that includes Ann Arbor and Minneapolis.
“9. There were dozens of targets which would have made sense for al Qaeda to attack before getting to liberal Senators Daschle and Leahy.”
Not if you understand their motivation — to retaliate for the rendering and torture of senior EIJ leaders since 1998 by security units funded by Daschle and Leahy. (See “Leahy Law” that permits the continued funding upon “extraordinary circumstances” such as, well, the GWOT. The Leahy Law and his aspect was the subject of an article in the second most widely read website at the end of August 2001. Not only was he in charge of the Judiciary Committee overseeing the FBI, but Senator Leahy was in charge of the Senate subcommittee in charge of appropriations to Israel and Egypt, which is Ayman’s big beef.
“10. It’s a near certainty that the second (sophisticated) powder was made after the first (crude) powder failed to alarm anyone. And it was almost certainly made somewhere in Central New Jersey.”
Director Mueller indicated he does not buy the “sound the alarm” theory when he said as to motive, “Think 9/11. Think Oklahoma City.” He is pointing to a deep hatred of the US/US policy as the motive.
“11. The return address on the Senate letters appears to have been deliberately scrambled to eliminate any chance that the anthrax-filled letters might be returned to some REAL school. It does not seem logical that a terrorist organization like al Qaeda would even bother to take such precautions.”
The key to analysis is that the same return address was used — permitting the second one to be located. This is also what was done with the al Hayat letter bombs. That is because the point of the letters is to send a message. Such as “We have this anthrax. Are you afraid?”
“12. The whole anthrax letter episode shows that a lot of precautions were taken to avoid harming anyone, which makes no sense for al Qaeda just after they killed THOUSANDS of men, women and children on 9/11. Terrorist tactics are generally to hit hard, and then to hit HARDER.”
Different rules apply to use of a poison under the hadiths. They did not have the legal ruling they needed for mass killing using a poison.
The Washington Post once reported that the FBI was considering Al-Timimi for involvement in the anthrax mailings — perhaps access to know-how given he had a top security clearance and had access to ATCC and Center for Biodefense facilities, and worked in the same building as famed Russian bioweaponeer Alibek and former USAMRIID Bailey (who moved from USAMRIID to the center in Mid-March 2001. Can you imagine Al-Timimi, a pious gentleman who was expert in interpreting the hadiths and who spoke on the fiqh of warfare, planning an aerosolized anthrax attack that would then land on his head? On October 6, 2002 he drafted a letter for OBL’s sheik and had it hand-delivered to every member of Congress.
Today’s news discusses this issue of the rules of warfare.
“This new document ... is a collection of rules to help jihadists avoid violating Shariaa during their conduct of jihad.” It supplements his earlier treatise on the subject.
This forner leader if EU is a medical doctor (a surgeon), like Ayman. He was picked up (in Yemen, as I recall) in 2003. I believe he used to work closely with Ayman but they had a falling out some years ago when Ayman published something and took full credit when actuallly this fellow had done the heavy lifting.
Egypt: Jailed Al-Qaeda Ideologue Urges Halt to Attacks Contradicting Islamic Law
08/05/2007
http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=8894
Al-Zayat, the lawyer representing this jailed ideologue was the one who in March 1998 said Ayman was planning to use weaponized anthrax against the US to retaliate for the rendering of jailed EIJ leaders.
If Ed wants to posit what Ayman or his supporters would do, he should read their writings on the subject rather than just making assumptions. They have written quite extensively on the rules governing the conduct of jihad to include the use of poisons. Indeed, Ed should start with this book — there are differences among the EIJ intellectuals and those differences can further help in profiling Amerithrax.
For example, one colleague who had worked with Attorney Zayat in promoting a political party was arrested recently for being Ayman’s link with jihadists in Egypt, Iraq and Yemen. The fellow was arrested after AQ senior leader al-Hadi was captured. (Al-Hadi was a confidante and once the chief aide of Ayman). Al-Hadi was captured late last year — possibly in Iran while trying to get back to his native Iraq. The attorney arrested, Mamduh something, was the attorney for al-Nashar, an expert in polymeriization who had a key to the London bomb flat. The jihadis and their associate have a wealth of technical skill — Ayman had 40 doctors just in his familly. Giving warning upon the use of a nonconventional weapon is to be expected according to expert Michael Scheuer and Princeton islamist expert Bernard Lewis.
It was only after al-Hadi, Zawahiri’s former chief aide was captured, that we learned from the AG that the FBI Director expected some sort of resolution to Amerithrax in the relatively near future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.