This idea was all over Free Republic.
What does it take the NY Times five months for?
What does it take the NY Times five months for?Well now that is the question isn't it. If any Freeper can figure out before their first cup of coffee that the anthrax attacks followed the hijackers' itinerary and stopped when they hit the buildings - and that the likeliest source for the anthrax was Atta's contact with Iraqi spies, you can only conclude that the NYT was being a team player in not asking questions about something this obvious.
The next question is how obvious is it - after we now know about Richard Reid - that AA587 was bombed?
But this story is completely new, with new information. Let's review:
Previous stories have mentioned that Two of the hijackers, Marwan Alshehhi and Saeed Alghamdi, rented an apartment from the first anthrax victim.
We also know that Mohamed Atta went to a pharmacy in late August for treatment for skin and chest irritation..
This is more than just a series of coincidences. At any rate, it is beyond dispute that the cell was involved in the Florida anthrax attacks.
It seems to me that any qualified journalist or media outlet out to crack the anthrax case in the early stages, after the Florida death, would have jumped all over this lead. That's the problem with reporting these days, they report these bits and pieces of stories with news flashes and no follow up. Here at FR all of the reports seem to be investigated and pieced together so well that it puts the so-called investigative reporters to shame.