Congress Asks: Who Misled the Anthrax Investigation by Pointing at Iraq?

[babsbunny]

http://www.truthout.org/article/congress-asks-who-misled-anthrax-investigation-pointing-iraq

Friday 12 September 2008

by: Bill Simpich, t r u t h o u t | Report

Following five anthrax-related deaths in 2001, a bioterrorism team held a news conference at the Capitol to demonstrate anthrax cleanup procedures. (Photo: Kenneth Lambert / AP)

On September 16, the House Judiciary Committee will hold oversight hearings to review the FBI's role in investigating the 2001 anthrax attacks, followed by the Senate Judiciary Committee on the 17th. (Glenn Greenwald, August 20 interview with Charles Grassley).

Chairmen Senator Patrick Leahy and Congressman John Conyers have asked FBI Director Robert Mueller to attend. Conyers has specifically asked Mueller to address whether White House officials initially pressed the FBI to show the attacks were linked to Iraq, why Steven Hatfill was a key suspect in the investigation and why Bruce Ivins kept his security clearance for so many years.

If these committees hope to uncover the truth, they have to order several journalists and scientists to provide the basis for their claims that Iraq was a prime suspect in these attacks. No shield law protects journalists or their sources who plant phony evidence in a terror investigation.

[catgirl]

1. All fingers point to the White House and Tenet

[blm]

4. Don't count out James Woolsey. He was a key cheerleader connecting Iraq in the press.

.

[burythehatchet]

2. John Sidney McCain

[malaise]

9. Bingo n/t

[MissWaverly]

3. yes, misinfo endangered National Security

the perps of these attacks should have been caught instead of making it a prop for Middle East war campaigns.

[JohnyCanuck]

5. The Anthrax attacks seem to fit the "False Flag" type operation to a "T"

The US military and/or inteligence services (and their allies) have a history of using false flag attacks and provoking incidents to make it look like the designated enemy of the day is the real bad guy leaving just-minding-my-own-business Uncle Sam no option but to act to defend the USA and its allies, whether in a military fashion or by other necessary means.

False flag attacks occur when an attack is carried out by one side in a conflict situation on their own or allied countries or groups in such a way as to make it look like their designated enemy has carried out the attack. If the false flag aspect of the attack goes undetected (as it often has), this makes it relatively easy to demonize the targeted enemy, score propaganda points and build up public support for engaging in war etc.

Here are some examples of actual and planned false flag attacks with US involvement that have occurred in the last 50 years.

Operation Gladio/Strategy of Tension

Strategy of Tension

SNIP

The “strategy of tension” denotes a highly secretive series of interconnected covert operations conducted jointly by the CIA and MI6 largely in Western Europe during the this period. Well-documented by several respected historians, confirmed by official inquiries, and corroborated by former intelligence officials, the “strategy of tension” is one of those unsavoury moments in contemporary history that we don’t learn about in school, or even university.

My favourite book on the subject, and the most authoritative in my view, is Dr. Daniele Ganser’s NATO’s Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe (2004). Published in the UK as part of the “Contemporary Security Studies” series of London-based academic press Routledge, Ganser’s study is the first major historical work to bring the “strategy of tension” into the mainstream of scholarship.

During the Cold War, indeed through to the late 1980s, the United States, United Kingdom, and Western European governments and secret services, participated in a sophisticated NATO-backed operation to engineer terrorist attacks inside Western Europe, to be blamed on the Soviet Union. The objective was to galvanize public opinion against leftwing policies and parties, and ultimately to mobilize popular support for purportedly anti-Soviet policies at home and abroad – most of which were really designed to legitimize brutal military interventions against nationalist independence movements in the “Third World”.

SNIP

The existence of this secret operation exploded into public controversy when in August 1990 upon the admissions in parliament by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti, the existence of ‘Gladio’ was exposed as a secret sub-section of Italian military-intelligence services, responsible for domestic bombings blamed on Italian Communists. Ganser documents in intricate detail how a subversive network created by elements of western intelligence services – particularly that of the US and UK - orchestrated devastating waves of terrorist attacks blamed on the Soviet Union, not only in Italy, but also in Spain, Germany, France, Turkey, Greece, i.e. throughout western Europe. Despite a number of European parliamentary inquiries; an European Union resolution on the Gladio phenomenon; NATO’s close-doors admissions to European ambassadors; confirmations of the international operation from senior CIA officials; and other damning documentary evidence; NATO, the CIA and MI6 have together consistently declined to release their secret files on the matter.

http://nafeez.blogspot.com/2007/05/strategy-of-tension.html

Operation Northwoods. (Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff planned false flag terror attacks to justify an invasion of Cuba)

U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba
Book: U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba
By David Ruppe
N E W Y O R K, May 1, 2001


In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes.

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662

Operation Ajax (Overthrow of democratically elected Prime Minister Mussadiq of Iran and installation of the Shah as dictator)

A 'great venture': overthrowing the government of Iran
by Mark Curtis

This is a slightly abridged version of part of chapter four of Mark Curtis's book The Ambiguities of Power: British Foreign Policy since 1945 (Zed Press, 1995).

SNIP

The coup decision is taken

The go-ahead for the coup was finally given by the US in late June - Britain by then already having presented a 'complete plan' to the CIA (54) - and Churchill's authorisation soon followed, the date being set for mid-August. (55) That month, the head of the CIA operation met with the Shah, the CIA director visited some members of the Shah's family in Switzerland, whilst a US army general arrived in Tehran to meet 'old friends', among them the Shah and General Zahidi. (56)

When the coup scenario finally began, huge demonstrations proceeded in the streets of Tehran, funded by CIA and MI6 money, $1 million dollars of which was in a safe in the US embassy (57) and £1.5 million which had been delivered by Britain to its agents in Iran, according to the MI6 officer responsible for delivering it. (58)

According to then CIA officer Richard Cottam, 'that mob that came into north Tehran and was decisive in the overthrow was a mercenary mob. It had no ideology. That mob was paid for by American dollars.' (59) One key aspect of the plot was to portray the demonstrating mobs as supporters of the Communist Party - Tudeh - in order to provide a suitable pretext for the coup and the assumption of control by the Shah(my emphasis /JC). Cottam observes that agents working on behalf of the British 'saw the opportunity and sent the people we had under our control into the streets to act as if they were Tudeh. They were more than just provocateurs, they were shock troops, who acted as if they were Tudeh people throwing rocks at mosques and priests'. (60) 'The purpose', Brian Lapping explains, 'was to frighten the majority of Iranians into believing that a victory for Mussadeq would be a victory for the Tudeh, the Soviet Union and irreligion'. (61)

The head of the CIA operation also sent envoys to the commanders of some provincial armies, encouraging them to move on to Tehran. (62) In the fighting in the capital, 300 people were killed before Musaddiq's supporters were defeated by the Shah's forces. AUS general later testified that 'the guns they had in their hands, the trucks they rode in, the armoured cars that they drove through the streets, and the radio communications that permitted their control, were all furnished through the military defence assistance program'. (63)

'All in all', US Iran analyst Barry Rubin comments, 'only five Americans with a half-dozen Iranian contacts had organised the entire uprising'. (64) The British input, however, had clearly been significant. One Iranian agent of the British - Shahpour Reporter, who subsequently served as adviser to the Shah - was later rewarded with a knighthood, before becoming a chief middleman for British arms sales to Iran, in particular for the manufacturers of Chieftain tanks and Rapier missiles. (65) Two years after the coup, the head of the MI6 end of the operation became Director of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, one of Britain's leading 'independent' academic research institutes. (66)

http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/articles/l30iran.htm

Gulf of Tonkin incident (Manufactured to justify further US intervention in Viet Nam). Not strictly speaking a false flag operation as the supposed attacks on a US destroyer that caused the controversy and allowed the US to further engage in Vietnam never actually occurred. But the idea is the same - lie as necessary in order to paint yourself in the minds of the public as the innocent, do-gooder unjustly attacked by a ruthless, evil and lawless enemy who by his underhanded actions leaves you no option but to act to defend yourself.

30-year Anniversary: Tonkin Gulf Lie Launched Vietnam War

By Jeff Cohen and Norman Solomon

Thirty years ago, it all seemed very clear.

"American Planes Hit North Vietnam After Second Attack on Our Destroyers; Move Taken to Halt New Aggression", announced a Washington Post headline on Aug. 5, 1964.

That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: "President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and 'certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam' after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin."

But there was no "second attack" by North Vietnam — no "renewed attacks against American destroyers." By reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam War.

A pattern took hold: continuous government lies passed on by pliant mass media...leading to over 50,000 American deaths and millions of Vietnamese casualties.

SNIP

The official story was that North Vietnamese torpedo boats launched an "unprovoked attack" against a U.S. destroyer on "routine patrol" in the Tonkin Gulf on Aug. 2 — and that North Vietnamese PT boats followed up with a "deliberate attack" on a pair of U.S. ships two days later.

The truth was very different.

Rather than being on a routine patrol Aug. 2, the U.S. destroyer Maddox was actually engaged in aggressive intelligence-gathering maneuvers — in sync with coordinated attacks on North Vietnam by the South Vietnamese navy and the Laotian air force.

"The day before, two attacks on North Vietnam...had taken place," writes scholar Daniel C. Hallin. Those assaults were "part of a campaign of increasing military pressure on the North that the United States had been pursuing since early 1964."


http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261

In view of this history of false flag operations and the facts we now know:

1) About the source of the Anthrax - came from a US military lab

2) About the intent of the perpetrator(s) - obviously to demonize Arabs and Muslims by making the Anthrax containing letters look as if they came from Arab/Muslim extremists just at the critical point when the US was looking for a justification to invade the Middle East

3) About the targets of the Anthrax letters - Prominent news media personalities and 2 Democratic Senators, Daschle and Leahy, who were raising questions on the justifications and necessity for the Patriot Act,

I don't swallow the FBIs attempt to paint this as just the work of another "lone nut" in the person of a mentally unbalanced scientist Bruce Ivins. (And neither apparently does at least one of Ivins' colleagues.)

In case you need help to ad 2+2 and arrive at 4, what we have here, folks, is another false flag operation. Only on this one, the lid came off earlier than expected.

"We Americans are the ultimate innocents. We are forever desperate to believe that this time the government is telling us the truth." (The concluding sentence from the article linked above at FAIR describing the Gulf of Tonkin bamboozling of the US Congress and public into support for increasing military operations in Vietnam.)

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship"

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Herman Goering to French intelligence officer and Psychologist Gustave Gilbert at the Nuremberg Trials.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.asp

[JohnyCanuck]

10. Rep. Roscoe Bartlett ridicules FBI theory re. Anthrax attack.

HAGERSTOWN, Md. (Map, News) - U.S. Rep. Roscoe Bartlett is ridiculing part of the FBI's explanation for the 2001 anthrax attacks.

And the Maryland Republican says he's skeptical about the agency's conclusion that biodefense researcher Bruce Ivins grew the anthrax in his laboratory at Fort Detrick in Frederick and then mailed it to unsuspecting victims, five of whom died.

Story continued here: http://www.examiner.com/a-1583991~Rep__Bartlett_skeptical_that_Ivins_sent_anthrax.html
(Note that in my Firefox browser this text is somewhat difficult to see, but highlighting it with the mouse makes it easier to read and it is only a short article.)

[JohnyCanuck]

11. "The FBI's Mail-Sorting Theory Doesn't Add Up"

The FBI's Mail-Sorting Theory Doesn't Add Up

The FBI claims that mail-sorting equipment crushed the killer anthrax in the letters to Senators Daschle and Leahy down to a fine powder.

Is that possible?

Well, the anthrax spores in the Daschle letter were 1.5 to 3 microns, according to the . See also ().

There are 25,400 microns in an inch.

Mail-sorting equipment is generally built to handle letters at least 1/4 inch thick. Correspondingly, U.S. Postal Service guidelines allow letters to be up to 1/4 of an inch thick.

SNIP

1/4 of an inch equals 6,350 microns. So the FBI is trying to say that a mail-sorting machine which is designed to process letters 6,350 microns thick crushed something down to 3 microns . . . 2,116 to 4,232 times smaller than the type of envelope sorting machines are designed to handle (the smaller number is compared to 3 micron thick anthrax powder and the larger is compared to 1.5 micron powder) .

I don't know about you, but my mail isn't crushed into oblivion when I get it.

On the other hand, the hints at a more likely explanation:

"Since the early 1990s, U.S. Army scientists at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have made small quantities of weapons-grade anthrax that is virtually identical to the powdery spores used in the bioterrorist attacks that have killed five people, government sources say."

"Dugway’s production of weapons-grade anthrax, which has never before been publicly revealed, is apparently the first by the U.S. government since President Nixon ordered the U.S. offensive biowarfare program closed in 1969. Scientists familiar with the anthrax program at Dugway described it to the Baltimore Sun on the condition that they not be named."

"Dugway’s weapons-grade anthrax has been milled to achieve a concentration similar to that sent in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, according to a source. The strain found in those letters is indistinguishable from that used most often by Dugway."

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/09/fbis-mail-sorting-theory-doesnt-add-up.html

[philly_bob]

6. The most important question: who pointed to Iraq? Cuz we know who did...

Hatfill and Ivey, may be mysteries to history.

[glinda]

7. Give us a name

There should be nothing short of an exact name.

[JohnyCanuck]

8. kick n/t