but I think Iraqis could be forgiven for holding them.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/index.html
Tremendous fishiness around anthrax. If it *wasn't* a top US scientist, what are they covering up?
Link thanks to
james_nicoll. Weirdness because I honestly don't know how to deal with this.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/index.html
Tremendous fishiness around anthrax. If it *wasn't* a top US scientist, what are they covering up?
Link thanks to
no subject
Date: 2008-08-02 02:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-02 10:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-02 04:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-02 12:27 pm (UTC)I don't think the US gvmt was involved at all, though. Agents were really trying to pin the crime on someone & everyone just seemed baffled. The prime suspect certainly was weird, and I wasn't convinced by what I read either that he had done it or that he hadn't.
The article you link to seems off, to me, in saying that without the anthrax killings, 9/11 would not have been enough to put us in our currently besieged, bellicose condition. I think it was the icing on the cake.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-02 02:08 pm (UTC)I can believe the US would have become warlike as a result of 9/11, but accusing Iraq made that war more likely.