Re: Anthrax addendum.

From: Samantha Atkins (
Date: Mon Oct 15 2001 - 04:22:50 MDT

Stephan Vladimir Bugaj wrote:
op dusting business was a deliberate red herring).
> Rather lame approach of mailing it to the media, eh? Can you
> think of a better way to facilitate panic than to attack the
> propagandists directly and let them spread their own fear?
> Lame, my ass. If I were trying to drum-up a major war, I'd
> certainly spend the "intensive" labor of mailing germ warfare
> agents to the propaganda machine of a powerful and determined
> enemy. Read the Al Qaida propaganda, they WANT a major war,
> they WANT to spread enough fear to provoke the US to do
> something that will put all one billion muslims on their side.
> That is essentially their stated goal - to draw ALL muslims
> into a Holy War against the corrupt and decadent West and
> the opressive, traitorous Mid East regiemes that the West
> supports.

>From where I sit the US is quite interested in a major and
indefinite war. Are you utterly sure some elements of your own
country are not planting just enough anthrax to create a scare
and justify going after the next target? I am not sure of that
at all at this point. Our campaign is massively dishonest and
ill-defined. Something is driving us beyond the horror of 911.

> Attacking the media with Anthrax wouldn't be a tactic to get
> body-count, it would be a tactic to spread fear. Now, of
> course, there is no proof that it was Al Qaida that did it as
> part of a deliberate fear tactic, but if it wasn't it is a
> HELL of a coincidence (especially since the first cases
> were contracted at a time that roughly coincides with the
> attack...)

Coincidental evidence is not evidence. Some would like to claim
it came from Iraq so we can go bomb there. Many experts don't
believe it is part of anyone's campaign at all.

- samantha

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:13 MDT