Posted on 02/08/2003 7:10:06 PM PST by Gorilla44
And in other news: The FBI announced today that the American public should be on the lookout for angry white right-wing males driving white trucks in the Washington, D.C. area, as these types are the FBI's prime suspects for the recent sniper shootings in that area... < /MOCKING >
Could have more to do with Tony Blair at Camp David OR the Snipers since those ponds were VERY CLOSE to where they were picked up and maybe there was something on the computer they had.
There should be 2 profiles, one for the scientist and another for the "runners" which would fit the Snipers so close, it's pathetic (excepting they're assuming a white male AGAIN such as Timothy McVeigh). They never say white in their profile but it certainly is implied. Don't forget, Mohammed Williams had the anthrax vaccine during the Gulf War.
Because Chemicals are Saddam's specialty. We know ABSOLUTELY that Saddam has Anthrax, the scientists & deliverers. It's why I associate the specialty of the snipers (hit & run)to Saddam as deliverers.
Usama's "specialty" is buildings and bombs. His deliverers normally wind up dead.
P.S. Had the snipers stopped earlier, would they have gotten away?? Probably, just like the anthrax scenario. I think they didn't get paid for their anthrax scenario. Since they couldn't retaliate against their "real" enemy..they went on a "watch how it works" (hit & run).
That would make sense. He has never made any attempt to hide the fact that the weaponization analysis shows the anthrax came from Iraq.
I dunno. Even the Washington Post is getting suspicious...
The technical term for that is a "hint." America is being blackmailed by Saddam Hussein, and Saddam's victim is hinting to the blackmailer and the watching world that he might be close to exposing the blackmail. It is a reminder that, even if we can't do anything about the anthrax now, sooner or later, we can and will reveal the truth. So, short of taking an early retirement in Tangiers, Saddam will be exposed, as will his enablers at the UN.
On a smaller scale, Cheney did the same thing on MTP last fall, blurting out of nowhere: "Who sent the anthrax, Tim?" A couple of other interesting things happened in the run-up to the 9-11 anniversary speech to the UN. First, a few weeks before the speech, the FBI very publicly announced a hunt for the undiscovered anthrax letters in the AMI building. The search was scheduled to end 9/11/02. BTW, two anthrax letters were received at AMI, according to the CDC, and both were read by their recipients. Despite that, no details of what was in them have ever emerged. Can you guess why?
Hatfill's press conferences last August had a dual purpose: they both served to inject life into a fraying cover story (hence the whopper about the non-existent girlfriend and the non-existent FBI interview), and they served as a hint to Saddam Hussein, just before Bush's UN speech, that the cover story might be retired. Saddam Hussein is the blackmailer here: he knows that Amerithrax is a cover story. He's following the fate of Amerithrax very closely, of that you can be quite sure.
That was what Woodward wrote in the Washington Post on October 27, 2001. This is from his account of a National Security Council meeting of October 17 in Bush at War:FBI and CIA Suspect Domestic Extremists
Officials Doubt Any Links to Bin Laden
By Bob Woodward and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, October 27, 2001
Top FBI and CIA officials believe that the anthrax attacks on Washington, New York and Florida are likely the work of one or more extremists in the United States who are probably not connected to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terrorist organization, government officials said yesterday.
Senior officials also are increasingly concerned that the bioterrorism is diverting public attention from the larger threat posed by bin Laden and his network, who are believed to be planning a second wave of attacks against U.S. interests here or abroad that could come at any time, officials said.
They turned to the hot topic of anthrax. The powder in the letter mailed to Senator Daschle's office had been found to be potent, prompting officials to suggest its source was likely an expert capable of producing the bacteria in large amounts. Tenet said, "I think it's AQ" – meaning al Qaeda. "I think there's a state sponsor involved. It's too well thought out, the powder's too well refined. It might be Iraq, it might be Russia, it might be a renegade scientist," perhaps from Iraq or Russia. Scooter Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, said he also thought the anthrax attacks were state sponsored. "We've got to be careful on what we say." It was important not to lay it on anyone now. "If we say it's al Qaeda, a state sponsor may feel safe and then hit us thinking they will have a bye because we'll blame it on al Qaeda."Fast forward to the United Nations General Assembly, February 5, 2003:"I'm not going to talk about a state sponsor," Tenet assured them.
"It's good that we don't," said Cheney, "because we're not ready to do anything about it."
Back to the conclusion of Woodward's book:
As we walked back, Bush again brought up Iraq. His blueprint or model for decision making in any war against Iraq, he told me, could be found in the story I was attempting to tell--the first months of the war in Afghanistan and the largely invisible CIA covert war against terrorism worldwide.And let's check in with CBS News for a report: Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11."You have the story," he said. Look hard at what you've got, he seemed to be saying. It was all there if it was pieced together--what he had learned, how he had settled into the presidency, his focus on larger goals, how he made decisions, why he provoked his war cabinet and pressured people for action.
I was straining to understand the meaning of this. At first his remark and what he had said before seemed to suggest he was leaning towards an attack on Iraq. Earlier in the interview, however, he had said, "I'm the kind of person that wants to make sure that all risk is assessed. But a president is constantly analyzing, making decisions based upon risk, particularly in war--risk taken relative to what can be achieved." What he wanted to achieve seemed clear. He wanted Saddam out.
Before he got back to his truck, Bush added another piece to the Iraqi puzzle. He had not yet seen a successful plan for Iraq, he said. He had to be careful and patient.
"A president, he added, "likes to have a military plan that will be successful."
Everybody figured this out by now?
In other words, the ricin plot actually matured in France. Both the French and Germans are aware of this: the information they have constitutes that damnable "smoking gun" the media are always blathering about. Yet they still oppose action against Hussein. It's looking increasingly to me, anyway, like something much more sinister is going on with France and Germany than merely their desire to protect their own financial interests in Iraq. Hence the ping to MadIvan, to solicit his take on all this, plus any news from his country about the ricin plotters' connection to cells in France.
Being on the outside looking in, folks like you and I certainly don't know all the pieces of the puzzle. But there can be no doubt in any thoughtful person's mind that the anthrax attacks, and other bioweapons threats, are what's driving U.S. and British actions against Hussein. That's why I so resent the breathless, accusatory tone of the 9/4/02 CBS article you posted a link to. Given Hussein's history, it would have been the height of recklessness for any SecDef NOT to issue an immediate order on 9/11/01 to the military to draw up contingency plans to attack Iraq, just in case. On that very day, at that very moment — indeed, while Rumsfeld was still helping with the wounded, as the CBS piece says — our government could not assume anything and had to prepare for every possible contingency. At the time, we didn't know if there would be other attacks at any moment, from any direction.
Of course it always had to be Iraq. What other countries were we at war with on 9/11/01? This is not brain science, except to the libs -- but then, for them, everything is brain science.
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.
