What came first-anthrax or mobile chemical weapons labs?

[babylonsister]

This could explain why the anthrax was used but never traced to its source. Americans weren't sufficiently terrorized, at least perhaps not until the anthrax was conspicuously placed. I never considered this before.

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2008_01_27_archive.html#1478498919040540480

Doesn't Anyone Remember Anthrax?

Yglesias:

"There has not been another attack on our soil since 9/11" -- anthrax! Anthrax! Oh well. For some reason that whole episode has been officially erased from the historical record or something.


Indeed. And anthrax was what made things like "mobile chemical weapons labs" sound so scary. Not everyone agrees, but I think more than 9/11 the anthrax freaked the country out. 9/11 was horrible, but the anthrax made it seem like we'd reached a new era where some horrible creepy shit was going to happen every day.

And then it was all forgotten.

-Atrios 08:18

[bryant69]

1. I'm not sure the two go together

the Anthrax may have been sent by internal terrorists that we've completely lost interest in, but they did have a basis in reality. On the other hand, the mobile chemical labs may have been a tad bit more fictional.

Bryant
check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[babylonsister]

2. But the anthrax inspired fear, which could be what its ultimate use was for.

The labs were never found, but that didn't stop the gov't from scaring the bejesus out of many people with the threat of them.

[bryant69]

3. Well i probably don't need to convince you that the fear of the mobile chemical labs

was a selling point on the Iraq war - the Bush administration wanted to invade Iraq so emphasized information that fit their narrative.

On the other hand it's hard to know what the Anthrax plot was all about without knowing who actually sent it (assuming it wasn't just a hoax, in which case presumably the Bush administration, in conjuction with a few democrats, were behind it).

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Virginia Dare]

4. Why would a few Democrats want to poison their own?

or even terrorize them?

[bryant69]

6. Acceptable losses

I don't know. let me be clear, I think it was most likely some other twisted right wingers, unconnected directly with the Bush Family, who did it.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Virginia Dare]

7. What do you think the motivation was?

and how did these twisted right wingers get their hands on it? This is not a McVeigh-type attack, this was a sophisticated series of hits using a strain of anthrax that would be very difficult to get ahold of without some inside help.

[bryant69]

8. I think their motivations were let's mess up some peopel we don't like very much

I don't know the answer to those other questions; I'm just don't think the ANthrax came from Iraq's mobile weapons labs.

Bryant

[Virginia Dare]

9. No, it was U.S. military anthrax...

that's why it's so puzzling as to why we can't figure out who released it.

[babylonsister]

5. I wouldn't call it a hoax; a few people did die from it. I have always

considered this admin was behind it, but never considered any Dems. Hmm, food for thought. I just can't quite figure out what their motives might be, whereas the BFEE's motives are obvious.

[TheFriendlyAnarchist]

10. We will truly know if it was MIHOP after the election.

[Javaman]

11. Anthrax was never to be used to terrorize us. It was to terrorized congress...

if you recall the only two dems that were on board to derail the "patriot act", were the only two to get the anthrax. Mission accomplished.

[madrchsod]

12. yes it was

and the first guy to fall was the editor /owner of the tabloid newspaper who was working on the florida connection to the terrorists. the two people in new york-i think- what was that about?

did you know it cost almost 400 million to build a new postal facilities after they found out the chemicals they used destroyed all the machines...

[Javaman]

13. All about money. nt