Korean Job Discussion Forums

[RufusW]

Good job boys.

Case closed: government involvement and cover-up.

(In the world of business Cost-Benefit Analysis is God. You can break the law as long as you get fined less than you make doing so. The same is true for stuff like this; who benefits from 9/11 or the war in Iraq? Contractors, military, big oil, neo-cons etc. The 'profit' they make means it's really worth doing something like this - and will be in the future)

[Ya-ta Boy]

[some waygug-in]

Make fun of me if you like, I am an easy target.

Here's some light reading for you.


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

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).

[loose_ends]

MM2 et al probably believe that female pimp, whom provided for Washington's elite, committed suicide too.


Or maybe not. Baby steps boys.

[mindmetoo]

[loose_ends]

[some waygug-in]

More twists and turns in the anthrax case:

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/twists-and-turns-in-anthrax-case-by.html

Twists and Turns in the Anthrax Case

by dday

There is a very coordinated push to leak details about the late Bruce Ivins to certify that he is the "lone nut" anthrax killer, details which don't entirely hold up upon scrutiny. There's definitely a desire on the part of the government to make this an open and shut case seven years after the fact, but it doesn't completely hold together. In fact, the media reports are almost all contradictory.

[mindmetoo]

[mindmetoo]

[some waygug-in]

Didn't read the link?

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/twists-and-turns-in-anthrax-case-by.html


While genetic analysis had linked the anthrax letters to a supply of the deadly bacterium in Dr. Ivins�s laboratory at Fort Detrick, Md., at least 10 people had access to the flask containing that anthrax, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the investigation publicly.

Agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation also have no evidence proving that Dr. Ivins visited New Jersey on the dates in September and October 2001 when investigators believe the letters were sent from a Princeton mailbox, the source said.

The source acknowledged that there might be some elements of the evidence of which he was unaware. And while he characterized what he did know about as �damning,� he said that instead of irrefutable proof, investigators had an array of indirect evidence that they argue strongly implicates Dr. Ivins in the attacks, which killed 5 people and sickened 17 others.



And Ivins held security clearance as recently as last month and was only barred from the Ft. Detrick site after counselors warned of his "deteriorating mental condition."

This could be a guilty man knowing the walls are closing in, or a marked man who was harassed into suicide because many in government wanted to close the case. The point is that there are a lot of questions, and until the evidence is revealed there's no reason to accept the official story. It is called "unlikely" that Ivins even knew how to produce weaponized, dry anthrax and didn't have access to it. (The site Anthrax Vaccine is going to be indispensable going forward; Dr. Meryl Nass, the author, and Glenn Greenwald appeared on Democracy Now this morning.)

[bacasper]

Here is an excerpt from a relevant Democracy NOW! interview:

AMY GOODMAN: The FBI�s prime suspect in the October 2001 anthrax letters case died last week in an apparent suicide. Bruce Ivins was an elite government scientist at the biodefense research lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland. He was among the nation�s top experts on the military use of anthrax.
...
Whether Ivins was guilty or not, the case also raises key questions about how the anthrax scare was initially linked to Islamic terrorists and Iraq. In a piece for Salon.com, attorney and author Glenn Greenwald writes repeated claims by the mainstream media linking the attacks to Saddam Hussein helped shape American perceptions about Iraq in the lead-up to the invasion.

...
Glenn Greenwald, let�s begin with you. When you heard about Bruce Ivins being the key suspect, about to be indicted, apparently�we all learned this after his suicide�can you talk about your reaction?

GLENN GREENWALD: It�s hard to have any reaction to anything that the government and the FBI say about the anthrax investigation other than extreme skepticism. In light of the fact that everything that they�ve done and said over the past seven years, by all accounts, has been either completely inept or, worse, deliberately misguided away from the true source of the anthrax. And so, all of these news accounts over the past several days that have suggested that Bruce Ivins is the person behind the anthrax attacks are lacking one critical ingredient, and that�s any evidence whatsoever that those claims are true.

And the one thing that I would underscore is, as you said in your introductory remarks, the L.A. Times, when they reported this story originally, said that Ivins was about to be indicted, trying to suggest that it was literally imminent, like a day or two away. And yet, a New York Times story this morning spoke with various investigators at the FBI who have now backtracked significantly on that claim, and they�re saying that all of the evidence that they have against Ivins is, quote, �entirely circumstantial� and that the grand jury intended to hear evidence for at least several more weeks before deciding whether or not to indict him. So there�s all sorts of really mystifying questions that have plagued this case from the start, and there�s even more now, in light of this recent event, and what we need is a real public hearing of all these facts.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn to Senator McCain and his comments soon after September 11th. He was on the David Letterman show. It was October 18, 2001. And he brought up Iraq as a possible, quote, �second phase� of the war in Afghanistan. He said the anthrax may have come from Iraq.

[mindmetoo]

[some waygug-in]

Well, unlike you many others think just the opposite... including one of the recipients of an anthrax letter:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/03/national/main4317549.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_4317549

AP) Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, whose office was a target of the anthrax attacks in 2001, said Sunday the suicide of the government's main suspect does not mean the case is over.

Daschle said the FBI has not given him any new updates. He also raised questions about the quality of the investigation, noting that the government recently paid out almost $6 million to a former Army scientist, Steven Hatfill, who accused authorities of unfairly targeting him in the anthrax case.

"From the very beginning I've had real concerns about the quality of the investigation," Daschle said in a broadcast interview. "Given the fact that they already paid somebody else $5 million for the mistakes they must have made gives you some indication of the overall caliber and quality of the investigation."

~.~

and later goes on to say:


Unfortunately, it doesn't bring anything to closure," Daschle said. "This probably further complicates their ability to get to the facts."

He said he did not know if the investigation involving Ivins "is just another false track and a real diversion of where they need to be. We don't know, and they aren't telling us."



My point was, that the evidence against Ivins is not that great and I was thinking that you might be assuming that it was rock solid.

Bad assumption on my part, my apologies.

[mindmetoo]

Loose ends here is an example of conspiracy thinking gone mad:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

The Clinton Body Count

1) Define "associate" loosely
2) Ignore many on the list are in dangerous jobs or in high stress jobs
3) Ignore a man who becomes president for two terms is going to be associated with a lot of people

[mindmetoo]