Back in the Day, Anthrax Was Used to Justify Iraq War

by on August 1, 2008 22
0sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle

Everyone is talking about Glenn Greenwald’s fine piece on how the anthrax scare was used to justify the Iraq war back in 2002–that the alleged Saddam-anthrax connection was what tipped guys like Richard Cohen to support the disastrous invasion. Read it! I got to read it a second time before I try and say anything intelligent, or halfway intelligent….

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Beyondoweiss, Iraq, US Policy in the Middle East

{ 22 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. the Sword of Gideon says:
    August 1, 2008 at 7:58 pm

    Is it possible that the "Black Jesus" ( still think that belongs to Earl Monroe btw ) is having problems.

    Gallup Daily: Race Tied at 44%
    Registered voters evenly split in their support for Obama versus McCain

    USAElection 2008Gallup DailyAmericasNorthern America
    Click here for Gallup's special roundup of July's important election polls.

    PRINCETON, NJ — According to Gallup Poll Daily tracking from July 29-31, John McCain and Barack Obama are now tied at 44% in the preferences of national registered voters.

  2. Glenn Condell says:
    August 2, 2008 at 12:40 am

    'Surely the question of who generated those false Iraq-anthrax reports is one of the most significant and explosive stories of the last decade.'

    Yes it is. They could perhaps begin looking in the same place the Niger forgeries came from. It sounds like a 'special plan' to me. Doug Feith isn't real busy right now; he might be able to help.

  3. D. says:
    August 2, 2008 at 1:28 am

    I wonder if any of the media will address the glaring question of why the messages were explictly crafted to sound like the work of a Muslim? ("Allah is great. Death to Israel. etc.") Are journalists still taught the principle of cui bono?

    But then this is the same media which, in the run-up to the Iraq war, resolutely refused to acknowledge that there might be a constituency which stood to gain from the destruction of Iraq. So perhaps we shouldn't get our hopes up.

    It seems that in America when the J-word comes up, the conversation suddenly turns infantile.

  4. charles Keating says:
    August 2, 2008 at 7:17 am

    Your American tax dollars at work:
    "Imagine your children leaving in the morning for school and returning later in the day to find their home, their whole world, has disappeared while they were gone,” Shawamreh said. “It’s happened to my children four times. It’s cruelty beyond words.” link to counterpunch.org

  5. charles Keating says:
    August 2, 2008 at 7:42 am

    But how else will Palestinians "recognize Israel" and its "right to exist?"
    link to latimes.com

  7. Richard Witty says:
    August 2, 2008 at 11:08 am

    What did you believe at the time?

    Glenn Greenwald's article was very interesting.

    I felt that that the time had been shaken and that the idiot nutty right revolutionary opportunists were on the march.

    ANYONE could have weapons of mass destruction, and only those malevolent enough to want to use it.

    If you want to speak of dual loyalty, it would be RELEVANT to speak of those neo-fascists within the military that have access to such materials.

    And, use them.

  8. MM says:
    August 2, 2008 at 11:35 am

    I still think this guy Zack did it

    Hey just because a guy hates and torments a Muslim co-worker doesn't make him a murderous sociopathic zionist, Rowan.

  9. Ed says:
    August 2, 2008 at 11:51 am

    Witty: "I felt that that the time had been shaken and that the idiot nutty right revolutionary opportunists were on the march."

    They were. They're called "Christian" Zionists, and they are the mirror image of the idiot left revolutionary opportunist Jewish Zionists that you are so fond of, Witty.

    Greenwald: "Ivins' local paper, Frederick News in Maryland, has printed several Letters to the Editor written by Ivins over the years."

    In one, Ivins wrote: 'By blood and faith, Jews are God's chosen, and have no need for "dialogue" with any gentile. End of "dialogue." '

    Ivins was a Christian Zionist, and Greenwald says this is an example of Christian doctrine. But this is an explicit rejection of Christian doctrine; this is Jewish doctrine, through and through.

    I've always known that deep down those "Christian" Zionists were degenerate little Jew wannabes, and insane to boot. This proves it. Let the insane "Christian" Zionists and the insane Jewish Zionists now all huddle and cling together as history closes in on them.

  10. 5 dancing shlomos says:
    August 2, 2008 at 12:03 pm

    psychopathic sad zack did it and peculiar that judith miller received only a harmless white powder.

  11. Ed says:
    August 2, 2008 at 12:18 pm

    'By blood and faith, Jews are God's chosen, and have no need for "dialogue" with any gentile. End of "dialogue." ' — Ivins

    No wonder the Israelis and their Jewish Zionist sponsors in America have always been cold towards dialogue with the Arabs. No wonder the Bush administration has always been cold towards diplomacy — with everyone. These screwballs just don't want to lower themselves to having a conversation with the non-"chosen."

    Functioning sociopaths all.

  12. 5 dancing shlomos says:
    August 2, 2008 at 12:28 pm

    cancel my post re zack above at August 02, 2008 at 12:03 PM

    dont know. need to do further research. re miller i believe my comment correct.

  13. charles Keating says:
    August 2, 2008 at 4:20 pm

    So what's new? Look at the "American firsters" back in the day, in the 1930's. How do they differ from the American-Israel Firsters today? Check out their words–don't worry; only American goys wil mainly pay in blood and treasure.

  14. Richard Witty says:
    August 2, 2008 at 5:12 pm

    Actually, the nuts that actually did kill Americans from American military labs, were "patriots".

  15. student of history says:
    August 2, 2008 at 5:45 pm

    "How do they differ from the American-Israel Firsters today?"

    Charles, having seen some of your millions of posts, I hesitate to ask this, but what the heck are you talking about?

  16. samuel burke says:
    August 2, 2008 at 7:24 pm

    Greenwald does a bang up job of tracking through the anthrax deception story…false flag comes to mind here but its probably too early to connect dots that far out but it seems to me that its elementary.

    keep the entertainment media cranking and the fed printing dollars cause if america were to wake up from their stupor things will never be the same.

    itll be payday someday.

  17. MM says:
    August 2, 2008 at 7:29 pm

    Actually, the nuts that actually did kill Americans from American military labs, were "patriots".

    Pretty sly, Rich. But I get it.

    Here we are discussing one of the most heinous crimes in U.S. history–a media hoax of epic proportions, kinda like War of the Worlds, but with 5 dead bodies and millions terrified for months.

    Richard Witty sees this as an appropriate occasion to chide Phil, once again, for having something in common with non-left-wingers ("patriots").

    (Witty is talking of course about the obvious McVeigh-Buchanon-Weiss-Anthrax continuum.)

    Funny though, Rich: Tim McVeigh for example, he didn't conduct a false flag operation when he bombed the Federal building on Oklahoma City. He didn't dress up in a turbin and say ALLAH IS GREAT to try to make it look like Arab Muslim extremists were responsible.

    Usually groups who undertake terrorism for ideological reasons make it clear what they stand for.

    So this anthrax looks like a pretty damn manipulative operation.

    Gotta wonder what in Bruce Ivins' patsy mind made him do it.

    (Mass media is now telling me that he was going to profit from the antidote. As we all know, mad scientists really do exist, they work for the U.S. government, and they do that kind of shit all the time.)

  18. Smelling BS says:
    August 2, 2008 at 8:59 pm

    What jurisdiction with a top secret government research institute would allow the description that is attributed to the "mental health" worker described to be put in the public sphere? The description is beyond belief.
    “*Duley added that Ivins's psychiatrist called him "homicidal, sociopathic with clear intentions," and that "FBI involved, currently under investigation & will be charged w/ 5 capital murders. I have been subpoena to testify before a federal grand jury August 1, 2008 in Washington, D.C.." Duley's court filing was apparently triggered by several threatening phone messages left by Ivins early last month.”

    http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax1.html

    Think about this. She could have contacted the Federal Agents.
    Is this just for our propaganda to say this is our guy?

  19. charles Keating says:
    August 3, 2008 at 11:55 am

    Witty, they were not patriots at all. They were religious nuts, backing Israel to the nines–Israel of course could care less about the imagined Final Days–they are only concerned with
    Greater Israel now.

  20. charles Keating says:
    August 3, 2008 at 12:01 pm

    RE: ""How do they differ from the American-Israel Firsters today?Charles, having seen some of your millions of posts, I hesitate to ask this, but what the heck are you talking about?–student of history

    SOH, there's a new elite in America. Haven't your read Phil's articles? America First is now Israel First. They use the old tactics. The message is the same. Nobody much notices that it is Israel that is the major concern; they conflate it with USA interest. Lindbergh is now Adam Sadler. Or at least, Senator Lieberman.

  21. Student says:
    August 3, 2008 at 1:57 pm

    The America First party of the late thirties was an anti-war, non-interventionist party that expressed the sentiments of the majority of the American population. It was neither racist, demagogic, conspiratorial, "fascist," nor "antisemitic."

  22. charles Keating says:
    August 3, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    Student: Correct. Ron Paul gives you an A. Do you think our government's actions, especially under Bush, and (they hope) McCain, is under the America First Party colors? Don't look at official names, donkeys, elephants, look at regime conduct. Which practical political party is the clone of the America First Party today as you correctly define it? If you come up with none,
    what does that mean?

Leave a Reply