FALSE NEO-CON MEME: No terror attacks on US soil after 9/11.

[robertpaulsen]

Oh really? Try telling that to the friends and families of Robert Stevens. Or Kathy Nguyen. Or Ottilie Lundgren. Or Thomas Morris Jr. Or Joseph Curseen.

What do all five of these people have in common? They were all killed in terror attacks on US soil that occurred after 9/11! Did all you neo-cons forget about the anthrax attacks?!

For those who have, here's a refresher:

The anthrax attacks came in two waves. The first set of anthrax letters had a Trenton, New Jersey postmark dated September 18, 2001, exactly one week after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Five letters are believed to have been mailed at this time, to ABC News, CBS News, NBC News and the New York Post, all in New York City; and the National Enquirer at American Media, Inc. (AMI) in Boca Raton, Florida.<1> AMI also publishes a tabloid called Sun where Robert Stevens, the first person who died from the mailings, worked. Only the New York Post and NBC News letters were actually found; the existence of the other three letters is inferred from the pattern of infection. (Some unconventional theories of the case do not posit five letters <2>). The anthrax found in the New York Post letter is reported to have become damp before being discovered.<3> Scientists examining the anthrax from the New York Post letter said it appeared as a coarse brown granular material looking like Purina Dog Chow.

Two additional anthrax letters, bearing the same Trenton postmark, were dated October 9, three weeks after the first mailing. The letters were addressed to two Democratic Senators, Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Patrick Leahy of Vermont. More potent than the first anthrax letters, the material in the Senate letters was a highly refined dry powder consisting of approximately one gram of nearly pure spores. Some reports described the material in the Senate letters as "weaponized" or "weapons grade" anthrax. The Daschle letter was opened by an aide on October 15, and the government mail service was shut down. The unopened Leahy letter was discovered in an impounded mail bag on November 16. The Leahy letter had been misdirected to the State Department mail annex in Sterling, Virginia, due to a misread Zip code; a postal worker there, David Hose, contracted inhalation anthrax.

Twenty-two people developed anthrax infections, eleven of the life-threatening inhalation variety. Five died of inhalation anthrax. In addition to the death of Robert Stevens in Florida, two died from unknown sources, possibly cross-contamination of mail: Kathy Nguyen, a Vietnamese immigrant from New York City; and Ottilie Lundgren, a 94-year old widow of a prominent judge from Oxford, Connecticut, who was the last known victim. The two other deaths were employees of the Brentwood mail facility in Washington, D.C., Thomas Morris Jr. and Joseph Curseen.

Thousands of people took a two-month course of the antibiotic Cipro in an effort to preempt anthrax infections. The Associated Press reported that members of Vice President Dick Cheney's staff took Cipro on the night of the September 11 attacks as a precaution, a week before the first anthrax attack. <4>

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

I decided to make a separate thread about this after posting it here:

So, is it pretty much accepted that Bushco did the Anthrax letters?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1580042

Regardless of your views of who is responsible for mailing the letters, I don't think there's any question that the BFEE is covering up the truth by not creating a commission to investigate these terror attacks. What have they got to hide?

[stepnw1f]

1. They Didn't Forget. The neo-cons sent the Anthrax.

[robertpaulsen]

3. Funny coincidence how those letters all went to Congressional Dems.

Well, maybe not funny. Just a coincidence. :sarcasm:

[stepnw1f]

4. indeed... funny how Dems Offices Got

a really good cleaning too.

[msongs]

2. uh oh, 9/11 happened AFTER bush took over, sooo..

if he is responsible for anything like preventing attacks he has to take the blame for allowing it.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[alfredo]

5. If you remember Osama's goals you will see why there hasn't been

an attack on US soil.

He wanted to destroy our economy, and our influence world wide. He had studied the Vietnam war and realized the best way to take us down was to get us engaged in a protracted war on their turf. He set out to goad us into attacking by attacking the Cole, the Khobar towers, and the Nairobi embassy. Clinton didn't take the bait. He treated them like criminals and fought them on that level. So Osama decided he had to do something spectacular, and ultra violent. It would be so bad that we would lose our heads and plunge headlong into war.


As long as bush does what he wants, Osama has no need to invade.

[peacebird]

6. and what bush does gets $$$ to daddy and dick as well as Osama's papa

so hell - it's all good - Right?

:sarcasm:

[alfredo]

10. You know dubya will get a lot of green handshakes after he

leaves. He will need it if war crimes charges are brought against him.

[Stevepol]

7. Exactly alfredo. and if you're good at googling, you can find

a reference to an Al Qaeda intercept or discovered handbook or such (discovered by the military in Afghanistan I believe) which says exactly what you're saying. The point is very simple: why come to the US when you've got the whole US Army right at your doorstep, exposed, with supply lines available from every terrorist supply depot in the known universe right at your elbow.

As soon as we exit Iraq, Al Qaeda will attack us here, but they will have been immensely strengthened by our having invaded Iraq and having set the whole Muslim world on fire, which means practically the whole world. The new attacks, after we exit Iraq, will be much bolder and expert than those that happened before, because they will have had all those years to practice on sitting ducks in Iraq.

I saw a guy on C-Span read from this Al Qaeda handbook or what have you and make exactly this point. It's exactly what Al Qaeda wanted and wants. You could probably find this by googling.

So in a sense the Righties are right. We haven't had as many attacks on the mainland since we've been in Iraq, but the reasons for that are quite obvious and have absolutely nothing to do with some grand master plan from El Prez and his merry band of chickenhawks to attack the terrorists where they live.

[alfredo]

8. You need to read "Imperial Hubris" It really shows how bush

has been sucker punched by al Qaeda.

[robertpaulsen]

11. The only way the neo-cons will exit Iraq is through Iran.

Once that happens, it will eliminate any necessity for al-Qaeda to ever launch an attack on us here. Why? It would achieve the goal alfredo mentioned Osama has: destroying the US economy. Sure, we would "control" most of the oil in the Middle East in that event. But would good is that when the infrastructure to produce it is destroyed to the point where the pipelines are referred to as flutes because of the number of holes in them drilled by insurgents? Not to mention what kind of economic leverage China or Russia might pull on us. Putin's already starting an oil bourse trading in rubles. Who knows what the reaction might be if we shoot for "regime change" in Iran.

The PNAC has always had a master plan. It's just based on insanity, or inhumanity, take your pick.

[tyedyeto]

9. Will the 'No Korea aiming at Hawaii' count...

as a terror attack?