digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Vital unresolved anthrax questions and ABC News

salon.com — A top U.S. Government scientist, suspected of the anthrax attacks, commits suicide. ABC News knows who is responsible for false reports blaming those attacks on Iraq, but refuses to say

show profanity settings
expand all
  • yugandhar, on 08/01/2008, -2/+109this reporting should not go unnoticed. digg it up!
    • seltaeb4, on 08/02/2008, -0/+21No, this reporting MUST not go unnoticed.

      It is our moral imperative as Americans—should we deem ourselves truly worthy of that title—to demand answers to the questions that Salon's Glenn Greenwald has raised.

      For if we do not act—who will?

      The Bush Administration is not going to come clean on this story.

      ABC News would dearly love every last person on Earth to ignore this story, because it shows that multiple, independent sources in the Bush Administration, in order to build the drumbeat for war, deliberately supplied their newsroom with utter fabrications. ABC News then unwittingly took these lies and became a broadcast vehicle for the dissemination of the Administration's falsifications. Thus, ABC News is, in part, is responsible for our pursuit of this fallacious war.

      The blood of our children, the wealth of our nation, and our honor as Americans has been squandered, falsely, on a war of aggression—in OUR names.

      Real Americans will have no doubt about their next actions: first, to see that this story is not buried away, again; and secondly, to vigorously demand answers until the truth is revealed.

      http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/ ...

      You know what to do. Get to it, friends and countrymen.



    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4Who was that at the UN, holding up a vial, saying Iraq was producing anthrax like we produce corn?
    • BossKey, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3Yet another "Al Qaeda terrorist" threat that turns out to be a white American.

      Did you know that the last suicide bombing on American soil in front of a packed sports stadium was by a white American male in the Midwest? Look it up.

      And they want to do racial profiling and take our laptops at the border due to "external" threats...
  • miamidolfan13, on 08/01/2008, -3/+109"suicide" how convenient.
    • welliwonder, on 08/02/2008, -0/+16yes there are a good few of those convenient suicides
      • 5urr3al5am, on 08/02/2008, -11/+3democrats anyone? the Clinton's aren't above having someone 'removed'
      • CryRightardCry, on 08/04/2008, -1/+4@suckingsam

        Yes loser, we get it, you are bringing up Foster.
        Just like I'll bring up Laura's boyfriend she killed. Oh, and the woman who claimed Bush forced her to get an abortion. She turned up "suicided".
        And that madam who said she'd NEVER commit suicide. It's funny, but when you do business with the GOP suddenly you feel like killing yourself.
        I guess it's too much to hope you'd get a sudden attack of honor or integrity and do the same.
    • rz8472, on 08/02/2008, -0/+21I remember there was one in Britain ... a former member of the Blair Administration who resigned right before Operation Iraqi Freedom because of Tony's support for the Iraq War.
    • Naieve, on 08/02/2008, -0/+13I usually like to go for the easiest answer, which is he was guilty, but the government already screamed wolf once.

      Now I have trouble believing them in round 2.
    • DestroyFascism, on 08/02/2008, -0/+6Suicide by influence of a certain agency?
    • elarson, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2makes me think of the framed suicide in Michael Clayton.
    • manicmarvin, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2Why did he target the guy that published this?
      http://www.newsgarden.org/columns/images/jenna.jpg
      Inquiring minds want to know...
      • JCPahl, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1The link is broken, but iirc one of the targets was the editor of the tabloid that published unflattering pictures of the Bush daughters, which is what I assume Jenna refers to?
      • manicmarvin, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Yeah -- the one where she is wasted, falling down on her friend.
    • augustwest30, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3Something smells fishy. A co-worker of his got paid off $5.8 million after he was wrongfully accused. The government doesn't just hand out millions of dollars to everyone they falsely accuse of a crime. I think this was hush money. I think the guy who committed "suicide" may have been involved in sending the letters, but he got his orders from someone higher up. He was ready to name names and they had to kill him and make it look like suicide. All of these anthrax letters were sent to drum up support for going to war in the Middle East. Notice no Republicans got letters?
  • panicbombs, on 08/01/2008, -1/+44Any guess how much coverage ABC news will give this topic on its nightly news? I am sure they will bury their role. Maybe ABC's Jake Tapper can play the "Anthrax" card today like he did by accusing Obama of the Race card. People should boycott all things Disney and I would if ESPN did not have a monopoly on all sporting events.
    • CandidateZero, on 08/02/2008, -0/+17ABC News will correctly assume the American public has a short memory and sweep whatever it needs to under the rug.
      • toetagger, on 08/02/2008, -3/+4Sweep what under the rug?
      • MizSwann, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1What?! There's a rug? ? ? !? ? !
        WHERE!! ?? !!
    • PabloMac, on 08/02/2008, -12/+1Are you actually saying Obama didn't play the race card?
      • PabloMac, on 08/02/2008, -4/+1Wow, buried by a bunch of ostriches.
      • MizSwann, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1Ummmm......no.
        we're saying he DID (and MUST!) play "The Race Crd"
        NOW DO YOU UNDERTAND, GRASSHOPPER??!!
      • PabloMac, on 08/03/2008, -0/+1That explains it, as it does go along with the old secular-progressive Affirmative Action mindset.
    • solidcube, on 08/02/2008, -1/+13Why are you still watching sporting events at all? They're circuses designed to distract people from things that really matter, and to generate an "our team" mentality regarding the war and politics.

      If you have to watch that asinine stuff, there's this great thing called bittorrent.
      • disappointment, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Who watches non-broadcast sport events?
      • solidcube, on 08/02/2008, -1/+10Ah, yessss, you have that thing called "caring who wins."

        Me, I don't have that. I don't give a flying ***** which group of ass-patting millionaires in tight pants symbolically rape each other better.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -1/+6you had me until the "and I would if ESPN did not have a monopoly on all sporting events."

      Way to make a sacrifice!
  • BigMommaLurka, on 08/01/2008, -1/+89I remember how the Anthax attacks ratcheted up the "freak" factor after 9/11. I did not even notice at the time that the targets were all either Democrats or prominent news people, (none of whom, I now see, worked for ABC).

    A media that does NOT follow the clear trail of evidence in this matter is complicit and should be charged.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -1/+11Do you see all the stories about news guys taking cipro weeks before the anthrax attack? Yet none of them are now saying "hey, how did they know?"

      Add in the people targeted (anti-war), and I am PISSED. This needs to be story number one until resolved. I own this country, not the people pulling this crap. I want answers, and I want them NOW.
      • dagnome1984, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5Funny this issue has been brought up here before, yet you would normally be the first to call it *****. It's interesting how one blog post can make such a difference. Of course most of this is old news that has be rehashed. It's been known for a long time that the anthrax originated from a government lab.
      • 69fezz96, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2It's creepy when the realization that your elected officials and various alphabet agencies are the real terrorists and have been for decades. Sometimes I regret taking the red pill, for a few seconds that is.
      • ssn697, on 08/03/2008, -0/+3@dagnome

        I call ***** when the facts don't meet the claims. I take every issue separately.

        The facts so far in this case are pretty clear:

        Government make anthrax
        Sent to anti war people, with notes to make it appear Muslims were responsible
        Same government lab testing the anthrax
        government officials AND reporters taking Cipro weeks before the anthrax, on government recommendation.
        False information supplied to ABC.
        False reporting by ABC, passed on to the American people willingly
        All of this used to scare Americans into believing Iraq was going to poison us all
        Same falsities used to help secure popular opinion to invade Iraq

        Now, the government is conveniently saying they may close the case, without answering to this charade.

        See, the FACTS are there.
  • obliviousfool, on 08/01/2008, -0/+66Who fed that information to ABC news?!!!!

    This is crazy.

  • ssn697, on 08/01/2008, -3/+89"ABC News' claim -- which they said came at first from "three well-placed but separate sources," followed by "four well-placed and separate sources" -- was completely false from the beginning. There never was any bentonite detected in the anthrax (a fact ABC News acknowledged for the first time in 2007 only as a result of my badgering them about this issue). It's critical to note that it isn't the case that preliminary tests really did detect bentonite and then subsequent tests found there was none. No tests ever found or even suggested the presence of bentonite. The claim was just concocted from the start. It just never happened."

    *****. Give me a tin foil hat. A government employee (presumably) planted Anthrax, wrote letters making it appear to be from Arab extremists. Then, the SAME LAB does tests on the anthrax, and ABC reports (multiple times) a tie to Iraq that never existed.

    Now, the guy commits suicide as feds close in? This whole thing reeks, with ABC's involvement really high on the list.


    "It's extremely possible -- one could say highly likely -- that the same people responsible for perpetrating the attacks were the ones who fed the false reports to the public, through ABC News, that Saddam was behind them. What we know for certain -- as a result of the letters accompanying the anthrax -- is that whoever perpetrated the attacks wanted the public to believe they were sent by foreign Muslims. Feeding claims to ABC News designed to link Saddam to those attacks would, for obvious reasons, promote the goal of the anthrax attacker(s)."

    This is my new favorite story...
    • floatingorb, on 08/02/2008, -2/+9@ssn697 Perhaps I can be of some assistance with that hat; Fit and materials are important so I've reposted this for you:

      -- And now a word about Sn "protective barriers." Tinfoil is certainly not the material of choice for this application. It is uncomfortable (doesn't breath), unsightly, hard to apply, easily damaged, and socially unacceptable. Furthermore, it is not that effective (can even be detrimental if improperly applied-'rf burns') and it ruins the accoustics of the phone. Tin, being a relatively poor conductor and an ever-so-slight semiconductor acts as a non-linear device-- In radio lingo: "a detector". The wearer, in a sufficiently strong and modulated feild, could possibly begin to 'hear' voices. Thus, for this kind of application, I recommend the time tested fine brass, copper,or steel mesh. It breaths, it's effective, it can be almost invisible (or, at least, assumed to be a burka), and it is more resistant to mechanical and chemical damage (sweat).

      "one is glad to be of service"
      • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4Copper mesh, also known as a Faraday Cage, provides superior shielding. The only problem is it has to completely enclose your head to work properly.

        And you thought tinfoil hats were socially unacceptable. Just tell people you're either a beekeeper or a Cenobite.
      • digitalhair, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3I've been working hard behind the scenes defending the practicality of wearing tin foil hats... I've actually seen it go mainstream over the past year, so now I take it as a compliment when somebody notices I'm wearing one.

        It's really a badge of courage at this point.

        I will state, however, that having a matching quasi-futuristic tinfoil suit is somewhat tacky at this point, but who knows... if more facts like this come out, maybe one day I'll be the old man unwilling to accept the challenge of keeping up with times.

        I think my submission here sums up the argument for tinfoil hats pretty nicely:

        http://digg.com/world_news/Truth_Freedom_Justice_f ...

        Digg it up, please, so we can prevent other people from becoming victims of their own antiquity, only to start trying too late in the game in such a way that it leaves them vulnerable to the manipulation of the guy wearing the matching tinfoil spacesuit...
      • digitalhair, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3...by the way... Batman: The Dark Knight is much more enjoyable if perceived through this paradigm. It should really be seen as a masterpiece and a brilliant commentary about our current international social crisis - make sure you're wearing a tinfoil hat, of course...
      • floatingorb, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2Here is what the DoD has to say about 'tinfoil':

        "Since this technology utilizes radiofrequency energy, it can be defeated by the use of shielding provided by conductive barriers like metal or metal screen."

        **Now, what was that about "hats" again???**
        http://digg.com/general_sciences/DOD_Report_Bioeff ...
    • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -3/+8Uh oh, ssn697. If you don't watch your step you might end up a truther.

      Just kidding. All the same, that was an insightful comment.
    • cobophers, on 08/02/2008, -1/+7Good comments SSN, now if we could only turn the trolls lose on ABC and Disney!
    • DangerCollie, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4People leaking to the press should be protected, provided the leak stems from a genuine desire to expose a truth. But when a corrupt and criminal administration is using the media as a tool to spread propaganda, then there shouldn't be any protection for those involved. Sometimes intent does matter. If the intent was to deceive, then ABC owes them nothing.
    • 69fezz96, on 08/02/2008, -1/+1I seem to recall that when the letters were sent, they were supposedly sent by Al Ciada in response to some tabloid story making fun of Osama.
      • floatingorb, on 08/03/2008, -0/+1That was probably being thrown around in the news 'crawl'; I *think* I remember some crap like that also. {something else *new* after 9/11 that never went away -- that stupid crawl}

        I do know that the first guy killed, Robert Stevens, worked at a tabloid called the 'Sun' which was in the same building as the Enquirer which had published photos of the Bush daughter, Jenna, in an unflattering, drunken state down in Fl.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Stevens_%28pho ...

        --"The trail of anthrax spores in postal machinery and equipment shows the letter was originally sent to The National Enquirer at its previous address, then forwarded to the AMI building, which contained offices for both The Enquirer and The Sun, and ended up in the hands of The Sun's photo editor, Bob Stevens, 63."
        http://www.newsgarden.org/columns/anthrax/anthraxt ...
  • jei731, on 08/01/2008, -1/+52Government arranging for a causus belli is the traditional way to start wars and drive people to support things. Even Sun Tzu taught this. - Is it so far fetched that the teachings of the holy book of US military strategy might have been used in arranging for "a new Pearl Harbor" as desired in the Neocon plan for New American Century?

    Apparently Cheney seems to have considered it again, just recently, concerning Iran war:

    To Provoke War, Cheney Wanted Navy Seals As Iranians
    http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/31/cheney-proposa ...

    Now, how far fetched is it to bribe an anthrax scientist to send a few letters and then help cover up the deed inside the investigation team?

    Do remember, Dick Cheney's staff went on Cipro a month before the letters started:
    http://americanjudas.blogspot.com/2008/08/focus-sh ...
    • ssn697, on 08/01/2008, -3/+6I don't think you would bribe the guy. Did you see the letters to the editor he wrote to his town newspaper?

      Today we frequently admonish people who oppose abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide or capital punishment to keep their religious, moral, and philosophical beliefs to themselves.

      Before dispensing such admonishments in the future, perhaps we should gratefully consider some of our country's most courageous, historical figures who refused to do so.

      And then there's this rather cryptic message, published in 2006:

      Rabbi Morris Kosman is entirely correct in summarily rejecting the demands of the Frederick Imam for a "dialogue."

      By blood and faith, Jews are God's chosen, and have no need for "dialogue" with any gentile. End of "dialogue."


      The other part of this story that REALLY makes me wonder:

      "See this important point from Atrios about Richard Cohen's admission that he was told before the anthrax attacks happened by a "high government official" to take cipro. Atrios writes: "now that we know that the US gov't believes that anthrax came from the inside, shouldn't Cohen be a wee bit curious about what this warning was based on?"

      That applies to much of the Beltway class, including many well-connected journalists, who were quietly popping cipro back then because, like Cohen, they heard from Government sources that they should. Leave aside the ethical questions about the fact that these journalists kept those warnings to themselves. Wouldn't the most basic journalistic instincts lead them now -- in light of the claims by our Government that the attacks came from a Government scientist -- to wonder why and how their Government sources were warning about an anthrax attack?"
  • gsadamb, on 08/01/2008, -1/+64This is the most significant and disturbing news story in a long time.

    Clearly, there were numerous people in the government who knew the truth and intentionally lied to help drum up support for the Iraq war. There's a number of disturbing things about the whole story, perhaps the most disturbing thing is the complicity of our "free press" in deceiving the American public about such an important thing as the justification to go to war. The American public needs to know this.
    • enri, on 08/03/2008, -0/+1Ever heard of Sibel Edmunds?
    • Caffeinate, on 08/05/2008, -0/+1The nuclear missiles that sat out for several hours with no one realizing they were there was more disturbing for me, but this one isn't too far behind it.
  • Rotzooi, on 08/01/2008, -2/+76It gets stranger:
    From update 6 of this article: "ABC News is deleting any mention of my piece today in the comment section to their article on the Ivins suicide"

    Digg this up before the right-wing bury brigade jumps on this.
    • uu2b, on 08/02/2008, -0/+8Simple, send another attack dog after ABC. Send notice to other media outlets, even FOX "news" about ABC deleting the comments. They love to bash the other guy...

      post your comment on the ABC story here to reference the Salon story: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/comments?type=story& ...
      Let's see if any other "major" outlets pick up on this story. What has happened to this country? I can't believe that I could feel any worse than I did yesterday after reading the original article. Glen Greenwald is as good as it gets.

      Edit: Salon should have this story as their front page lead-in for the next week. I could hardly find it again buried at the bottom of the front page.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -0/+6Count me in on the "WTF is up with ABC" crowd. When you first posted this, there were a dozen comments at the ABC link comment page. Now? NONE. Zip squat diddly.

      You are part of the big 3, ABC. Sack up, and come clean...
    • dagnome1984, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3ABC deleting comments is nothing new.
  • jcm267, on 08/01/2008, -13/+4The analysis of the events of those days is awfully convenient, ignoring the realities of the time. There were news reports all over about Iraq's anthrax stockpile, the minimal amount of space it took to store extremely deadly amounts, the ease of reproducing this anthrax once obtained, and the various deadly methods of releasing this substance. Look at old CNN and NYTime articles from the 1990s and early 2000s about Iraq so you can see this in its full context. Dugg anyways since this is a thought-provoking article.


    FTA:
    And then, when President Bush named Iraq as a member of the "Axis of Evil" in his January, 2002 State of the Union speech -- just two months after ABC's report, when the anthrax attacks were still very vividly on the minds of Americans -- he specifically touted this claim:

    "The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade."
    • ssn697, on 08/01/2008, -1/+16Okay, so how does your first paragraph jibe with the fact that ABC was reporting that 4 government officials told them there was an ingredient in the Anthrax that only Iraq uses, despite there NEVER being any test that showed that? It ws then parroted among all the major media outlets.

      It would appear the government used the fear you mention, and ABC was a willing accomplice. Your comment actually supports the article. He says the fear of Iraq having Anthrax was used to foment the idea of war with the American public. I remember that CLEARLY. All the talking heads were spouting about Iraq poisoning our water supply, killing millions, etc.
      • jcm267, on 08/02/2008, -5/+3It definitely jibes with the article. CNN, the NYTimes, Newsweek, Time... Every major news source had been reporting on this stuff since the 1990s. The Clinton and the current Bush administration were saying the same things about Iraq's weapons program.

        The article used a single quote used in a state of the union address and tried to use it as proof that the Administration was trying to use the anthrax attacks to go to war with Iraq when Iraq's anthrax had been major news for years by that point.
      • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -0/+8Iraq may have had anthrax, but this strain was not from Iraq.

        On May 9, 2002, New Scientist published an article that reported:

        'The DNA sequence of the anthrax sent through the US mail in 2001 has been revealed and confirms suspicions that the bacteria originally came from a US military laboratory. The data released uses codenames for the reference strains against which the attack strain was compared. The two reference strains that appear identical to the attack strain most likely originated at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick (USAMRIID), Maryland. The new work also shows that substantial genetic differences can emerge in two samples of an anthrax culture separated for only three years. This means the attacker's anthrax was not separated from its ancestors at USAMRIID for many generations.'

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks

      • HumanCattle, on 08/02/2008, -1/+3911 Anthrax was an "Inside Job"

        The anthrax attacks in the United States were probably the work of a member of a U.S. biological warfare program, the magazine of environment pressure group Greenpeace Germany reported Wednesday. .. "The U.S. delegation believe it is an inside job. ... Their members also have more information than has been made public," Kirsten Brodde, a reporter for the magazine, told Reuters.

        http://whatreallyhappened.com/frameup.html
      • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4Joe

        3:30 in the morning for me. A little rummy (insomnia can be a real bitch. I am watching "Hackers" online to try to get to sleep), so if my comment misses your point, I apologize.

        There were FAR more than the single quote to promote the anthrax attacks. Senators (including McCain), and administration officials were all over the place, blaming Iraq. The Hannity's of the world were saying they were going to poison our water next. Every newspaper and TV news outlet was doing a story about it. The fact is, Iraq had nothing to do with it, but at the time, we were told explicitly, it was THEM.

        That is the fact of the matter. How it became that story is the REAL issue. ABC needs to come clean (did I just make an early morning pun?) on it's sources.

        I have reached the point where I just want the Republicans to pay for Bush. This, the "how can we start a war with Iran" stuff, gas going from a buck twenty to 4 bucks, while Republicans passed laws repealing specific laws controlling speculation, all the lying and using courts to make things they knew were wrong take 4-5 years to get through. I am fed up. The far right needs to be yanked by the collar, for the good of our country. It is embarrassing and shameful.

        Let the pendulum swing...
      • jcm267, on 08/02/2008, -2/+1@Hangly
        I wasn't trying to say that the anthrax came from Iraq. I was simply pointing out that Iraq had been reported to have anthrax by our mainstream media and by our leaders before Bush was even President.

        @ssn
        OK. So I looked at this again, and read the links to the bentonite claims this time instead of reading through the article only. Those are something. I'm just speculating here, but could it be that perhaps Ivins knew that Iraq was the only country known to use bentonite and added it to the anthrax himself, possibly doing so from a lab that he created at home? This guy would know better than just about anyone how to do this and frame Iraq. To me that's the most plausible scenario, because the other scenario that I can think of is that there's this massive conspiracy and honestly news about that would have come out by now. The meeting between Atta and the Iraqi intelligence officer may very well have been real, I don't know. I guess ABC might want/need to explain itself over this one, but even if they did nothing wrong they may jeopardize their ability to get any "scoop" in the future by revealing their source. Journalists have gone to jail for not revealing sources, even when they didn't appear to have done anything wrong.
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6687959/

        And it's not like Iraq wasn't a regime that directly sponsored terrorism, that at least gave the impression that they maintained WMD capabilities and desired to obtain nuclear weapons, that had an expansionist leader in the most strategically important region of the world, and that had no respect for the human rights of its own people.

        And I, for one, am not liking the idea of a radical like Obama becoming President and having both chambers of Congress including a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. I don't think that high gas prices was the Republicans' goals over the past 7 years, but I do think that high gas prices have been the far-left's goal for years. It is the far-left that has been blocking just about every one of Bush's energy independence proposals.
      • SquigglyP, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3The anthrax didn't have bentonite in it. He didn't add any to the anthrax, there was none in the anthrax. The reports of bentonite in the anthrax was false data. Could he have falsified that information himself and claimed that the anthrax had contained bentonite? Sure, maybe. But I'd like to think that the research on anthrax used in these attacks were carried out by more than just the one person, and I wonder what the odds are of the guy now accused of the attacks being the sole researcher investigating them must be? I don't know how many other people they have at that facility who work with anthrax, but one has to assume he's not the only guy who worked on this.

        And you suggest that ABC's future ability to get a 'scoop' might somehow be more important that divulging sources that could very well implicate the highest levels of government in a chemical terrorist attack on citizens in their own country, while in the same breath maintaining that Saddam was worthy of attack because he supported terrorists. Saddam gassed his own people! What a monster! But we get a link that might implicate Bush, Cheney, or some other high level US government or military official in the exact same sort of attack and you try to deflect the suspicion.
      • Caffeinate, on 08/05/2008, -0/+1Squiggly, my thoughts exactly. You put it very well, particularly in the second paragraph.
  • netturtle, on 08/02/2008, -0/+20"The letter sent to Leahy contained this message:

    We have anthrax.

    You die now.

    Are you afraid?

    Death to America.

    Death to Israel.

    Allah is great."

    "Ivins' local paper, Frederick News in Maryland, has printed several Letters to the Editor written by Ivins over the years. Though the underlying ideology is a bit difficult to discern, he seems clearly driven by a belief in the need for Christian doctrine to govern our laws and political institutions, with a particular interest in Catholic dogma."
  • MorganMghee, on 08/02/2008, -1/+27Another reason not to watch or read MSM.
    • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -4/+3I don't know... Sometimes they tell the truth by accident.

      Especially the local affiliates. They're usually not that bad.
  • AeroMerde, on 08/02/2008, -18/+3An unstable 62-year-old man finds out he's a step away from being tried for the deaths of numerous people in terror attacks using Muslim extremism as an excuse, and he shoots himself rather than spend the rest of his life a proven mass murderer behind bars with a lot of angry criminals.
    -or-
    Massive government conspiracy and cover-up involving media outlets.

    Let's apply Occam's Razor.

    Among a lot of assumptions in the article, the author also seems to act as though any discrepancies in what was shown during testing were extremely bizarre or deliberate lies. Look at the history of those samples--lots of disputes and no one agreeing on many different things.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks# ...
    It's also always easy to arrange things to look convenient and conspiratory in hindsight when you use selective perspective.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -2/+17First, he didn't shoot himself, he OD'd on tylenol with codeine, so you fail in your first paragraph.

      Second, you don't understand Occam's Razor. Failed again.

      Third, ABC reported that 4 government sources told them the anthrax contained a chemical used by Iraq, despite no test ever showing the substance. That is not in dispute. ABC now refuses to reveal their phony sources.

      It is also not in dispute that this false info was passed on as true by the government, multiple news outlets, and was used as device to convince America we needed to stop Iraq.

      The anthrax came from America. Our military. It was mailed to key members of the government and media, with fake Arab death notes. The SAME lab then did the testing on the anthrax. False information was passed on to the media from that lab/government. America then used the fake results, and fake threats as fodder for going after Iraq.

      Where exactly does Occam's Razor cut you?
      • AeroMerde, on 08/02/2008, -9/+2Right you are. Someone posted a link to a guy that shot himself twice in the head, and I assumed it was the same guy. My mistake. I don't even remember what that was about. Thank you for the correction.

        The rest of your stuff though doesn't add anything new.
      • SquigglyP, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5wait. You thought it was possible to commit suicide by shooting yourself in the head TWICE!?
    • solidcube, on 08/02/2008, -1/+7The problem with occam's razor is that it breaks down very, very easily in conditions of incomplete information.

      You don't know the whole story here. What may appear to be the simpler explanation may in fact be incorrect.

      There have been lots of very strange suicides and deaths in the last 10 years.
      • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -1/+6People also often misapply occam's razor to cut away relevant facts that do not fit their "simple" explanation.

        Like any model or tool it can hide as much as it reveals.
    • santaliqueur, on 08/02/2008, -10/+1Since this is Digg, the "vast right wing conspiracy" is all many people think of. Show any logic that's not far left, and you're dugg down. That's just how it is here, no matter what.
      • solidcube, on 08/02/2008, -0/+3What is this thing called "logic that's not far left?"

        You spout a stream of vile lies.
  • fireashes, on 08/02/2008, -3/+7Now Iraq is done. So blame IRAN.

    I think whatever happens Iran will be blamed for each case.

    I dont see any action or justice done to the liars. So be prepared. Iran will be blamed for anything and everything. I will not be surprised to see a lot of these news for Iran. Actually I am expecting these for Iran. They can do because America is already dead.
    • thepretext, on 08/02/2008, -0/+8We were always at war with Eurasia.
    • unitedstatians, on 08/06/2008, -0/+1Just wait until MSM 'Finds' an excuse to bomb them. Fox News Channel will have 20% of Americans believing that Iran was behind the WTC Attacks.
  • clammy1, on 08/02/2008, -3/+6this is gonna be a kick-ass movie of the week (if civilization doesn't collapse first)
  • brainboy77, on 08/02/2008, -3/+9the real question is whether or not it will pass the digg algorithm. i've seen a ton of stories that were not on the upcoming top 10 but hit the front page after about 6 hours. the upcoming top 10 stories took about another five hours, with only 4 of them making it.
  • allowners, on 08/02/2008, -1/+36"Well placed sources" = CIA black operatives.
  • mahsah, on 08/02/2008, -4/+6Musta mixed up the anthrax with his Coke.
  • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -9/+21I am amazed the truthers and Paulies aren't all over this story like stink on *****. This actually has factual data behind it. ABC has some serious questions to answer to. It looks like a huge smoking gun on the run up to Iraq.

    I guess there isn't enough ***** to make up for them?
    • paulmer2003, on 08/02/2008, -5/+1Uh, sir, the media can print whatever it wants.
    • spyd3rweb, on 08/02/2008, -2/+10There's vital unresolved questions regarding 9/11, but you know those just get swept under the rug. That satisfy you?
      • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -2/+1how about you address this story?
      • SquigglyP, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5this story will get swept under the rug as well, because no one is going to give a *****.

        Where's the outrage? Where are the people marching on washington? Where are the tens of thousands of letters flooding each congress member's offices? The people aren't doing any of these things.

        The people are sitting on their fat asses in front of a TV watching American Idol or Survivor or some other worthless *****, and the TV isn't telling them anything about this. 9/11 was important enough to break into other shows to cover. This story is apparently not important enough to even mention on the news more than just a couple sentences to inform people that some guy who may or may not have been involved with the attacks died. That's it. That's your coverage.

        And no one will care. Welcome to the USA.
    • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -4/+14I'm a truther and a Paulie and I am all over this thread like white on rice.

      I hate to be the one to break this to you, but if you know the Anthrax came from a US lab you're kind of a truther also.
      • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -3/+5well, I was about to give you ***** about how you can get a blimp story front page, but not something important like this.

        But, it is now front page ;-)

        Oh, and always questioning the government (which I do) doesn't make me a truther, as much as that might make you happy.
      • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -2/+8Maybe not a 9/11 truther, but an anthrax truther. The origins of the anthrax letters was some heavy duty conspiracy ***** five years ago.

        It doesn't matter what you call yourself. All that matters is we're on the same side.
    • Infinite84, on 08/02/2008, -1/+6Oh you mean the people who've been right all along? Keep chucking out childish insults as the facts continue to come out about this stuff.
  • sanil08, on 08/02/2008, -5/+0This one is better. Check the Wordpress site

    http://shishmish.info/
  • shithitinthefan, on 08/02/2008, -10/+3Why so serious?
    Some men just want to watch the world burn.
  • wesdenton, on 08/02/2008, -1/+31Ah yes, isn't it convenient how all these people continue to commit suicide just like the DC Madame.
  • ElCheLikesAudi, on 08/02/2008, -1/+8I wish I can digg 2 times!!!!!!
  • welliwonder, on 08/02/2008, -8/+5Alright, so lets say you catch all the people in this big government conspiracy. How are you going to charge them? Huh? How are you going to make sure they hang? Pft.. It's over people. Big Brother has won. Now go about your daily lives, having just enough to be happy and being a slave to the government corporation.
    • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -0/+12"Big Brother" is hardly the unified entity some people sometimes try to make it out to be. There have been power struggles from the moment of the CIA's creation. With the economy heading south I'll wager it's only a matter of time before the various factions in the government begin to fight amongst themselves.

      And there's your opportunity.

  • xxxkrogoth, on 08/02/2008, -1/+43Hmmmm let's see. Cannot trust the government, cannot trust the news, cannot surf the web without being tracked, cannot speak freely, can have my laptop taken from me when I enter the country, cannot have political criminals like Karl Rove or Dick Cheney brought before Congress or questioned, cannot trust the food to be safe, cannot know what our money will be worth anymore, cannot drive my car because of gas prices. And the hits just keep coming.
    • Naieve, on 08/02/2008, -1/+16Those hippy communes aren't looking so crazy anymore....
      • h3lx, on 08/02/2008, -2/+7I don't know, they look like willful containment facilities to me.
    • BrokenVisage, on 08/02/2008, -0/+11Don't forget fluoride and narcotics in our drinking water.
    • ObamAmerican48, on 08/05/2008, -0/+1I'm moving to Canada.
  • allowners, on 08/02/2008, -12/+5The Liberal media strikes again. Our government, in concert with
    corporate media, is a criminal conspiracy. The risk of false flag
    attacks for the remainder of this year into next: very high. Following
    any operation, expect a crack down on "liberals" (patriots), who refuse
    to quietly surrender our nation to the terrorists in our midst.
  • toetagger, on 08/02/2008, -6/+29There's no way the anthrax attacks were a 1 week from 9/11 - co-incidence. Who ever did anthrax, knew the timing of 9/11. Now that we know anthrax wasn't foreign - someone domestically knew about 9/11. It's not like 9/11 happened and then a domestic terrorist rushed to get the anthrax out - it would take too long. The two are linked. Follow the "money" - where's the motive? Who benefits? Who rushed to blame Iraq and call for war? That's who did it. Who ever ABC News is protecting must be very, very powerful.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -3/+8Can we just focus on this, rather than jumping off a cliff? A does not mean B. You are doing a disservice to this story. Knock it off.
    • joeanon, on 08/02/2008, -2/+3It's not coincidence.

      The anthrax attack had prepared his attack ahead of time and was just waiting for the right moment.

      That's how these doomsday prophets always think.

      911 was a sign it was time to unleash what this guy though would be biological terror.

      You're not using logical problem solving, your jumping to conclusions that you want to be true.

      Obviously the anthrax was developed ahead of time, but that doesn't mean the guy had a specific purpose any more than those people who buy military grade weapons and make their own survival bunkers.

      It's a mindset of being prepared for when the BIG ONE comes.

      It's safe to say in this guys life, 911 was the BIG ONE and it was the safest possible time to unleash an anthrax attack and do the most harm while being lost in the confusion and fear.

      If the two events were timed... why would they be a week apart. No, that was the time it took the guy to go from prepared biological attack to actually putting the plan in progress. In a week he made up the letters and likely found good drop off spots in mailboxes with cameras.

      If there was a link, then like the 911 plane attacks, it would have all been done simultaneously.

      Think about it, you've prepared the anthrax. Why would you wait a week after 911 when you could have the element of surprise. Why stir up all that ***** then wait a a week and then risk getting caught.

      In a terrorists mind, it would be dangerous to wait with a prepared substance, you might get found out, you might lose your chance.

      On top of all that, the facts are the facts. The anthrax came from the US and the hijackers came from the middle east. It's most probable from the facts that there is no link.

      Even taking Ivins out of the equation. The timing and the source of the anthrax all but prove the two acts are not linked.

      If it was the government, they would not have waited. Waiting with prepared anthrax and a people who know too much is a great liability.

      If the government did it, they'd use some type of secret op military or mercenary not Joe Scientist.

      Plus, give the unlimited power of the President some credit.

      If this was ALL a setup, then in the 90 days Bush ruled America before 911, why not ship the biological lab over to the middle east. Why make the anthrax in the US when likely your analysts could have told you it would be identifiable.

      If you were planning a grand conspiracy against your own nation.. would you produce the anthrax in a US lab ?

      I find that a ridiculous claim. Bush and Co. are assholes, but when it comes down to it, they aren't all that stupid. They have tons of resources on and off the record.

      The profile simply doesn't fit. Bush acted like a happy GOP President content to do nothing and push spending bills for his friends just like every GOP President does.

      If you were planning a major attack, would you really have the balls to be caught reading a childrens book while your largest city burned ?

      If it was a setup, Bush would have moved into action like the wannabe General he is. Bush would have KNOWN exactly when to rise up and protect America from the grave threat and such.

      Bush would have had the propaganda planned and waiting, but that's not how it went down at all. Either Bush is the worlds greatest actor, or the man was caught be surprise by 911.

      It's a long shot to position yourself to look incompetent as WTC falls as a means of distancing yourself from any responsibility.

      Bush couldn't have known that the people wouldn't immediately turn again him after the total blunder that was the WTC response. If it was planned his response would have been more competent and showed signs of being planned. Bush would have looked responsible and fast acting, not reading a childrens book up-side-down.

      The GOP is not that clever, they are fairly blunt with their strategies. They would not position Bush to look weak in order to distance him from a 911 conspiracy. That would be too much of a social risk. The incompetent position alone is enough to risk the entire conspiracy.

      Plus, on top of all this, history clearly shows the WTC towers have been targets for terrorists for decades.

      I don't see why it's so hard to imagine that after 30 years of attempts the jihadists finally got in one good shot.

      That's by far the most likely scenario. And people who say .. well no pilot can fly around skyscrapers simply doesn't grasp the concept that flight is 3 dimensional and when your hitting the tallest target in the city you don't fly around other buildings you just lower your altitude at the right moment.

  • BluesFan, on 08/02/2008, -0/+28This is ***** and I'm getting scared of the government what the hell are they capable of...NOTHING is unbelievable anymore and I'm nervous of what could be coming next.
    • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -1/+5Just remember that they're not Darth Vader and they're not Sauron. They're human beings who have limitations and who make mistakes.
      • sodade, on 08/02/2008, -3/+2Did you find the flaw in the Death Star? No? STFU
      • Hangly, on 08/02/2008, -1/+6They're in my R2 unit somewhere, I just can't figure out how to download them.
      • Izult, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1Hangly have tried hitting your R2 unit with a wrench? Works magic for mine.
  • superkendall, on 08/02/2008, -16/+1Why is this vital? Who cares now that we know who it was?
    • flogistan, on 08/02/2008, -0/+11You can't be that much of an incurious numb nuts. We don't know who did it. Did you even read the article?
  • macinit1138, on 08/02/2008, -0/+24"Always question the received reality, the consensus reality is often intentionally misleading." - George Carlin
  • spankaccount, on 08/02/2008, -12/+1Glen Greenwald, the sock puppet master speaks!!! Diggbots listen!
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5So ABC didn't report 4 government sources saying the anthrax contained an ingredient it didn't really contain, pointing the finger at Iraq? That was Greenwald 7 years ago?

      That wasn't us tracking it to a government military operation? That is all Greenwald?

      Anything cogent to add?
  • flogistan, on 08/02/2008, -1/+5Those letters to the paper sounded more like evangelical dogma than catholic dogma.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -2/+5Totally agree. Where did the Catholic spin come from? Someone who is clueless about religion? That was hard core, old Testament stuff, not some Catholic spin.

      The guy looked like an easy target, no?

      /yeah, go ahead, shoot me...
    • iburl, on 08/02/2008, -1/+1Most evangelicals do not support opponents of the death penalty, the only conservatives who seem to have a problem with state sanctioned execution are Catholics.
  • ren1999, on 08/02/2008, -0/+9I am suspicious of all of this.
    • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -1/+4I am generally suspicious of the government, then research and make my decision. This reeks to high heaven...
  • ssn697, on 08/02/2008, -13/+4no matter what comes of this, it makes me proud to be an American to know that I can be up at 4:30 in the morning, cooking some homemade red sauce for the folks coming over tonight, while talking about US government involvement in a something like this. And guess what, all you "this fascist state" whiners? No one is showing up at my front door to haul me off.

    We own this country, whether you want to believe it or not. Just grow a sack, and speak up.
    • sodade, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4I'll still feel for you when they do show up at your door and your red sauce burns.
      • ssn697, on 08/03/2008, -1/+2mmm. Had 8 people over tonight, and they LOVED dinner (the Judah fight was just okay).

        No "jack booted thugs" showed, and there was leftovers ;-)

        I brought this story up, and it reminded me why I love Montana. 7 of the 8 people were well aware of this, and we had a really lively discussion. I am really glad I live in a state where people actually pay attention, and give a *****.

        None of them use Digg, BTW. Not surprising...
    • vermax, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4if you ever get hit by lightning, be sure to say how it was impossible because it never happened before.
      you're like the people crowing all smug that there was no housing bubble.
      • ssn697, on 08/03/2008, -1/+1what a stupid, generalizing ***** you are. I sold my home it the Bay Area, because I KNEW there was a housing bubble.

        I am likely the only Black Sonar Tech from the USS Indianapolis, yet I post here, and many other places, all the time, never hiding the fact. "They" never came after me.

        Shut the ***** up, you clueless piece of *****, seems to respectable for you.
  • taureandevi, on 08/02/2008, -4/+8Bruce Ivins commits suicide before any charges are presented and may be considered the sole suspect before the case is closed. Okay. But it smells too fishy to me.

    September Eleventh was an inside job and the anthrax deaths and hospitalizations added to the level of FEAR.

    1956 Operation Big City Manhattan February.

    Danielle
    http://www.modernmusings.com
  • moulin1, on 08/02/2008, -2/+3That Ivins was the source of the anthrax I have no doubt. It came from Ft. Detrick and there is a very short list of individuals with access. But I can not believe that Ivins wrote the letter. The little we know of him displays an unmistakable intellectual arrogance. I just don't think it is in his nature to write illiterate messages. That had to be the work of a co-conspirator.
    • Luchio, on 08/02/2008, -0/+6Well, Ivins claimed he found a breach and anthrax traces on a co-worker desk and had to clean it up, so it most likely was either a co-worker or, most likely, a CIA operative doing this at night. But I don't think we'll ever know the real story now that he's dead... how convenient...
    • dselliott, on 08/02/2008, -0/+1Maybe he was smart enough to know that a message written with "intellectual arrogance" would clearly identify him, and thus disqualify the uneducated "terrorist" angle?
  • onyxcoltrane, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4FTA: "We now know -- we knew even before news of Ivins' suicide last night, and know especially in light of it -- that the anthrax attacks didn't come from Iraq or any foreign government at all. It came from our own Government's scientist, from the top Army bioweapons research laboratory. More significantly, the false reports linking anthrax to Iraq also came from the U.S. Government -- from people with some type of significant links to the same facility responsible for the attacks themselves.
    Surely the question of who generated those false Iraq-anthrax reports is one of the most significant and explosive stories of the last decade. The motive to fabricate reports of bentonite and a link to Saddam is glaring. Those fabrications played some significant role -- I'd argue a very major role -- in propagandizing the American public to perceive of Saddam as a threat, and further, propagandized the public to believe that our country was sufficiently threatened by foreign elements that a whole series of radical policies that the neoconservatives both within and outside of the Bush administration wanted to pursue -- including an attack an Iraq and a whole array of assaults on our basic constitutional framework -- were justified and even necessary in order to survive.
    ABC News already knows the answers to these questions. They know who concocted the false bentonite story and who passed it on to them with the specific intent of having them broadcast those false claims to the world, in order to link Saddam to the anthrax attacks and -- as importantly -- to conceal the real culprit(s) (apparently within the U.S. government) who were behind the attacks. And yet, unbelievably, they are keeping the story to themselves, refusing to disclose who did all of this. They're allegedly a news organization, in possession of one of the most significant news stories of the last decade, and they are concealing it from the public, even years later.
    They're not protecting "sources." The people who fed them the bentonite story aren't "sources." They're fabricators and liars who purposely used ABC News to disseminate to the American public an extremely consequential and damaging falsehood. But by protecting the wrongdoers, ABC News has made itself complicit in this fraud perpetrated on the public, rather than a news organization uncovering such frauds. That is why this is one of the most extreme journalistic scandals that exists, and it deserves a lot more debate and attention than it has received thus far."
  • citizenfury, on 08/02/2008, -0/+12All I can say is WOW.

    Glen Greenwald needs a promotion.
  • moulin1, on 08/02/2008, -0/+17From the NY Times story:
    Scientists familiar with germ warfare said there was no evidence that Dr. Ivins, though a vaccine expert with easy access to the most dangerous forms of anthrax, had the skills to turn the pathogen into an inhalable powder.
    “I don’t think a vaccine specialist could do it,” said Dr. Alan P. Zelicoff, a physician who aided the F.B.I. investigation when he worked at the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque.
    “This is aerosol physics, not biology,” Dr. Zelicoff added. “There are very few people who have their feet in both camps.”

    THIS WAS NOT THE WORK OF ONE PERSON
  • iburl, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5They can't suicide all of us. Forward this story to your address book.
    http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/ ...
  • bbwolf7, on 08/02/2008, -0/+5FTA "As I said, it is not possible to overstate the importance of anthrax in putting the country into the state of fear that led to the attack on Iraq and so many of the other abuses of the Bush era. There are few news stories more significant, if there are any, than unveiling who the culprits were behind this deliberate propaganda. The fact that the current GOP presidential nominee claimed back then on national television to have some "indication" linking Saddam to the anthrax attacks makes it a bigger story still."
  • WebWizard, on 08/02/2008, -0/+7If you wanted to ratchet up the MSM and public opinion in favor of attacking Iraq, sending Anthrax laced letters to a few and suggesting to the rest that they take Cipro would be a great start. Who benefits?
  • dagnome1984, on 08/02/2008, -0/+7Another interesting thing to note:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slgBrbNXrbs

    Turns out that Cheney entertained an idea to fake an Iranian attack on U.S ships.
  • BlacklabelSAR, on 08/02/2008, -0/+7And in the History Channel's program about the JFK assasination, Oswald was clearly the only shooter.

    Orwell nailed it.
    • SquigglyP, on 08/02/2008, -1/+1Oswald was clearly the only shooter.

      That fact, however doesn't rule out the possibility that Oswald was working for Johnson, the Russians, or whoever else you'd like. He was involved in some way in both the CIA and KGB. There is documentation to confirm that. Why do you JFK "multiple shooter" people get so hung up on the idea that there HAS to be more than one shooter? The one shooter you have has leads all over him. Go follow some of those instead of wasting all of your time trying to bend the laws of physics to allow some imaginary second shooter.

      The Zapruder film, if you've studied it (and I know you haven't, you've read some ***** online or watched "JFK" and thought "OMG it's real there are moar shooterz!!") you can clearly see that there were two shots and both were from Oswald's direction and angle.
      • JCPahl, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2Back and to the left.
      • SquigglyP, on 08/02/2008, -1/+1maybe you missed the giant chunks of JFK's skull that fly forward with that shot as well, in the same direction the bullet was traveling, hmm?
    • unfairunbalance, on 08/04/2008, -0/+0E. Howard Hunt of Watergate fame admitted to being the one in charge of the shooters of the JFK assassination. Shooters is plural for the illiterate.
  • Eifandil, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2For the sake of simplicity:

    WTF.
  • kingUssop, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4This is real reporting. Give this man a Pulitzer.
  • VINLANDER, on 08/02/2008, -0/+4Pick an innocent person -> Torture him/her -> Make him/her commit suicide -> Close the case
  • NotGibbwake, on 08/02/2008, -0/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHB8LOb3JFg

    Anthrax, Congress and the Patriot Act On 9/18/01, the anthrax attacks started. The lethal anthrax spores -- which were sent along with notes purportedly written by Islamic terrorists -- used a weaponized anthrax strain from the top U.S. bioweapons facility, the Fort Detrick military base. Indeed, top bioweapons experts have stated that the anthrax attack may have been a CIA test "gone wrong"; and see this article by a former NSA and naval intelligence officer. "Coincidentally", White House staff began taking the anti-anthrax medicine before the Anthrax attacks occurred.

    Moreover, the only congress people mailed anthrax-containing letters were key Democrats, and the attacks occurred one week before passage of the freedom-curtailing Patriot Act, which seems to have scared them and the rest of congress into passing that act without even reading it (this is not a partisan issue, since this author believes that party affiliation is not a reliable indicator of loyalty to the Constitution; rather, the senators targeted just happened to pose a threat in 2001 to passage of the Patriot Act).While 9/11 was mainly aimed at the American people, the anthrax attacks were apparently aimed at Congress. Specifically, the bioterror scare appears to have been launched in order to instill sufficient fear and disruption among the few remaining legislators who still honor the Constitution that they would be willing to let the Patriot Act be passed without real analysis or debate.

    Think this is all far-fetched to be true? Well, the bioweapons expert who actually drafted the current bioweapons law (the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989) has said that he is convinced the October 2001 anthrax attacks that killed five people were perpetrated and covered up by criminal elements of the U.S. government. The motive: to foment a police state by killing off and intimidating opposition to post-9/11 legislation such as the USA PATRIOT Act and the later Military Commissions Act. Indeed, "The FBI has completely shut Congress out of its now five-year investigation into anthrax attacks on Capitol Hill and around the nation". In other words, Congress -- which legally has every right to know what really happened, and which was the main victim of the attack -- is being kept in the dark. (While many in Congress may be complicit in alot of dastardly deeds, you don't want the victims of a false flag attack to know who really attacked them).

    And the authorities have mysteriously failed to investigate the main suspect in the anthrax attacks, yet another indication that the attacks were a false flag misdirection.

    Without 9/11, the American public would not have given in to the Bush administration's imperial agenda. Without the anthrax attack, Congress would not have let the Constitution be demolished so quickly. A few legislators would probably have successfully stood against the Patriot Act, or at least demanded that that law be read and analyzed before it was adopted.

    While not nearly as many people were killed by the Anthrax attack as by 9/11, the anthrax attack was also an important false flag operation - one aimed directly at Congress

    (Alex Jones KLBJ) History Channel:Anthrax Attack, Inside Job http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHB8LOb3JFg
  • joeanon, on 08/02/2008, -7/+2Was the guy a religious nut ? That's what I had my money on.

    You people are so sadly riddled with conspiracy, it's pathetic.

    • mikesoba, on 08/02/2008, -0/+6That's probably the result of the Bush government committing so many acts of conspiracy and deception to create a reason for this war that have become public, that it is no longer so difficult to imagine the ones that have yet to be made public--or those that never will be made public
  • NotGibbwake, on 08/02/2008, -1/+13This is PROOF the US is framing muslims for terror. The Muslims werent behind this or 911.

    THE HIDDEN ANTHRAX LETTERS SUSPECT
    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/anthraxsuspect.h ...

    The FBI knows of a man who was caught entering the lab where the Anthrax used in the letters was kept, after he had been fired for a racially motivated attack on a co-worker. So, why is the FBI wasting its time with Bruce E. Ivins?

    A pathetic attempt to shift the focus on the Anthrax letters

    As most readers are already aware, the Anthrax contained in the letters sent to Congress was determined to be from a US military laboratory. This raised the question in the public's mind as to who, inside a US facility, would be playing games with Anthrax. Suspicion focused on Dr. Ayaad Assaad, an Egyptian scientist working at Fort Detrick, based on an anonymous letter. Because Dr. Assaad's race fit in perfectly with the agenda of sparking a war into Arab lands rich in oil, the media ballyhooed that the FBI was closing in on the "Arab Anthrax Terrorist".

    Ah, but the best laid plans gang aft aglay, and the FBI discovered that the end of the hunt for the sender of the Anthrax letters was NOT Dr. Assaad the Egyptian, but Dr. Zack, who is Jewish. At this point, both the FBI and the mainstream media stopped making any public comments on the case.

    The above BBC article is clearly another step in the plan to try to shift the suspicion for the Anthrax letters further away from the Dr. Zack, to spare Israel further embarrassment in what appears to be a modern day revival of the Lavon Affair. However, the claim that the Anthrax letters were simply an experiment in mail delivery that went awry is discredited by recalling that the envelopes and their contents were written in a way to cast suspicion for the letters in a specific direction, at Arabs! This clear evidence of a deliberate frame up proves that not only was this not simply a test procedure, but that the Anthrax in the letters was intended to kill people, while the letters themselves pointed the finger of blame.

    It would appear that even the BBC is not above spreading a little bit of propaganda.

    Proof of a deliberate frame-up is before your eyes - someone INTENDED for Arabs to take the blame.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.