Saddam and Anthrax Attacks

Orange_Juice

Senior Member
Jul 24, 2008
1,038
57
48
I guess he's off the hook? But what happened to those ABC news sources that said he was behind the attack? and what about the messages that went along with the attacks that tried to link the attacks to Islamic radicals?
 
I don't recall Saddam being blamed for the anthrax attacks.

Now now, don't ask him for proof. As I recall it was pretty much accepted to be something from THIS Country. You may find a few of the first reports claiming they thought it might be from Saddam, but you aren't going to find the Government making that claim, except as something to investigate.
 
Now now, don't ask him for proof. As I recall it was pretty much accepted to be something from THIS Country. You may find a few of the first reports claiming they thought it might be from Saddam, but you aren't going to find the Government making that claim, except as something to investigate.

Relying on your selective memory is about as creditable as trusting George Bush to tell the truth.

I'll post a bunch of things:

PressThink: Three Vital Questions for ABC News About its Anthrax Reporting in 2001

Center for Citizen Media: Blog Blog Archive ABC Has Major Questions to Answer in Anthrax Story

more to follow
 
I guess he's off the hook? But what happened to those ABC news sources that said he was behind the attack? and what about the messages that went along with the attacks that tried to link the attacks to Islamic radicals?

And why would he send Anthrax to Tom Daschle & Patrick Leahy? Those guys were preventing the Patriot Act from passing. That was making Chaney mad, not Saddam.

And why is ABC spreading Bush Administration propoganda?
 
Since when have jihadists given a shit who they target?

Oh, I don't know.

I'd say that taking down WTC was a rather well thought out target, wouldn't you?

It is, after all, or was, rather, the HQ of western imperialism, as far as they were concerned.

The Pentagon, also, a rather well thought out target, given its mission.

While I agree with you that many of the jihadists are probably not very sharp tools, I'm inclined to think the people leading those movements are nobody's fools.
 
Oh, I don't know.

I'd say that taking down WTC was a rather well thought out target, wouldn't you?

It is, after all, or was, rather, the HQ of western imperialism, as far as they were concerned.

The Pentagon, also, a rather well thought out target, given its mission.

While I agree with you that many of the jihadists are probably not very sharp tools, I'm inclined to think the people leading those movements are nobody's fools.


It was a well thought out target, as was the Pentagon. However, my comment was that they didn't care who they killed in making their statement. Not that they didn't choose targets well. They just aren't that loyal to the idiots who defend them.
 
It was a well thought out target, as was the Pentagon. However, my comment was that they didn't care who they killed in making their statement. Not that they didn't choose targets well. They just aren't that loyal to the idiots who defend them.

Yeah, they're not too concerned about collatoral damages.

Lot of that casual indifference going round, I'm afraid.
 
even Mccain on David lettermann I believe, a few years back, implicated Saddam....saying he could be the one behind it, or something similar....i'll look to see if i can find a clip of it on youtube, they showed it on Dan Abrahms the other night and even Mccain was indicating it could be saddam....

I remember it happening....with the administration and it stopped once they identified the anthrax coming from a usa military research facility....thru DNA matching.

What is strange is that the scientist that just killed himself, is the one that helped the FBI identify it coming from the base he worked at from the DNA samples of the anthrax....
 
Oh, I don't know.

I'd say that taking down WTC was a rather well thought out target, wouldn't you?

It is, after all, or was, rather, the HQ of western imperialism, as far as they were concerned.

The Pentagon, also, a rather well thought out target, given its mission.

While I agree with you that many of the jihadists are probably not very sharp tools, I'm inclined to think the people leading those movements are nobody's fools.

I think his point is Jihadists do not draw distinctions between Liberals or Conservative, or Democrats and Republicans. Some people might like to think they do but the truth is, if you are not a Muslim, you are a target. They could care less what your politics are.
 
THat's right. You're infidels, regardless. It's just a matter of the best way to use you.
 
Oh, I don't know.

I'd say that taking down WTC was a rather well thought out target, wouldn't you?

It is, after all, or was, rather, the HQ of western imperialism, as far as they were concerned.

The Pentagon, also, a rather well thought out target, given its mission.

While I agree with you that many of the jihadists are probably not very sharp tools, I'm inclined to think the people leading those movements are nobody's fools.

Both targets were symbolic in nature, not strategic. The WTC was the symbol of American financial power and the Pentagon the symbol of American military might. There was nothing to be gained strategically by striking at either. The point was to spread fear by striking at the symbols of our strength in our own country. Definitely a psychological tactic.
 
I remember it happening....with the administration and it stopped once they identified the anthrax coming from a usa military research facility....thru DNA matching.

What is strange is that the scientist that just killed himself, is the one that helped the FBI identify it coming from the base he worked at from the DNA samples of the anthrax....



maaaaaaaybe he figured out who it was and then the culprits had him killed.
 

Forum List

Back
Top