"- - - criminal investigators operate according to an ancient rule of logic known as Occam's Razor. This principle, named after William of Occam, states that before you can proceed to the improbable, you must first rule out the obvious. In other words, you cannot attribute your canary's disappearance to alien abduction until you first check out the neighbor's cat."

The FBI may be an exception to the "Occam's Razor" rule; otherwise why are we hearing so much about how the anthrax may be the work of "right-wing extremists"? See for example Anthrax Attacks 'Work of neo-Nazis'

The guy that wrote this column is "just connecting the dots" based on "published news reports". What (if anything) do the Feds have that makes them discount the obvious?

For some the Feds don't seem to want the dots to connect, it's as if they are lobbying for a domestic act of terrorism.

At least some in the mainstream media are connecting the dots. I am linking Spirit of Thruth's exellent thread here

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

Who let the anthrax out??? I think it was that dipsy blonde babe . . . Anne Thracks !!!

Kinda like the OKC bombing? Ignore reports of middle eastern men and voila its the right wing wackos...

Then, of course, there was Atta's keen interest in crop dusters---tried to get a loan to buy one, hung around crop dusting airfields asking questions, etc..

And how likely is it that domestic terrorists executed an elaborate, difficult-to-keep-secret project to manufacture and test sophisticated anthrax, and just sat on it, waiting for perhaps years, for some event like the WTC crashes to occur so they could "take advantage" of the situation? They would only marginally leverage the havoc by releasing anthrax after such an event. And it would be an unlikely coincidence that they just happened to complete manufacture of this anthrax around 9/11.

The FBI may be an exception to the "Occam's Razor" rule; otherwise why are we hearing so much about how the anthrax may be the work of "right-wing extremists"?

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to consider that home-grown neo-nazis might be "agenting" for the islamists. IIRC islamic terrorists have been involved with similar arrangements before, i.e., they've been cooperating with the IRA and various South American insurgents. (Please don't ask for cites, I'm working off memory of newspaper reports from years ago.)

And don't forget the evidence linking middle eastern terrs to mcveigh and company. Check out David Schippers' recent reporting on the topic.

As to why they would focus on the home-grown terrs now, it might be tactical. Maybe they want to let the islamist terrs feel like they're in the clear, so they'll lower their guard, and slip up so that we can nail 'em.

My point is that I don't think it's an either/or binary choice, where the involvement of one group obviates any possibility of the other group being culpable.

bttt