[lit-ideas] Re: Anthrax

  • From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 18:48:04 -0400


Thanks for this site, Robert. I don't find the author's argument against the al-Qaeda connection to be very convincing. It doesn't account for the huge amount of circumstantial evidence that it was al-Qaeda, and his objections to the al-Qaeda connection are easily answered.

His main objections to the al-Qaeda connection are:

*the hijackers were dead at the time of the October 14th mailing

Like...duh...are we to assume that the hijackers were the only al-Qaeda in the country? We know for a fact that there were several groups after 2001.

*Why would the mailer try to avoid civilian casualties by sealing the envelopes so carefully?

The object is terror, not mass casualties. Captured al-Qaeda documents show instructions for sealing the letters with a silicone sealant, so the letter reaches its target before doing harm. More about al-Qaeda's manual here: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/central/11/14/chemical.bio/

While I'm not committed to any particular explanation, I think the al-Qaeda argument is still the strongest--certainly much stronger than the homegrown terrorist thesis--and has not been countered in any way by the anthraxinvestigation site.

Meanwhile we have clear facts like this to account for:

*Al-Qaeda:  Anthrax Found in Al-Qaeda Home

Samples of substances found in the Kabul home of al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri tested positive for anthrax spores, according to U.S. intelligence officials, Newsweek reported yesterday...Full story at: http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/newswires/2001_12_10.html#11

------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: