New Details on F.B.I.’s False Start in Anthrax Case

[babsbunny]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/26/washington/26anthrax.html?_r=1

By SCOTT SHANE and ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: November 25, 2008

WASHINGTON — A federal court on Tuesday unsealed documents that shed new light on why F.B.I. anthrax investigators spent years pursuing the wrong man, Steven J. Hatfill, who was exonerated by the government this year and received a $4.6 million settlement.
Skip to next paragraph
Rick Bowmer/Associated Press

Steven J. Hatfill, once a suspect, was exonerated this year.

Search warrant affidavits said that Dr. Hatfill filled prescriptions for the antibiotic Cipro, the preferred drug for treatment of anthrax, two days before each of the mailings of anthrax-laced letters in September and October 2001. Under questioning by agents for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, he denied taking Cipro at that time, the affidavits said.

[sarcasmo]

1. How many suicides have benn related to this Anthrax case?

[panader0]

2. My money says no suicides

"Suicide" is term the government uses when they need to.

[JohnyCanuck]

3. Have the FBI been ignoring the "bigger picture" in their investigation?

Convenient how those anthrax laced letters, purporting to come from Israel hating, fanatical, Muslim terrorists (but containing anthrax from a highly secure US military lab) came at a convenient time to be seized on by the neocons and the media's pro-war propagandists to reinforce the belief that innocent US citizens were in danger if the US didn't take immediate preventive action to eliminate arch evil-doers Osama and Saddam.

Security Blanket: Western Democracy and the Strategy of Tension

by Chris Floyd

The idea that a democratic government would deliberately create fake "extremist groups" then send them out to foment violence and terrorism -- in order to discredit legitimate opposition to elite rule and to "justify" authoritarian powers -- has long been derided in "serious" circles as that worst of modern heresies: "conspiracy theory." Anyone advancing such a preposterous notion is instantly relegated to the ranks of the "lunatic fringe," and dismissed with varying degrees of contempt and condescension.

And the woeful fact that millions of the ruminants out there in the vast public herd swallow these wild tales and believe that their betters are up to no good is also widely deplored in the higher circles of public discourse. As any fully-accredited, perk-laden, sinecured think-tanker can tell you, democratic governments are led by men and women devoted to public service. Sure, there can be fierce disputes over policies and approaches and outcomes and ideologies and competence. Sure, some people may step over a line here and there in their pursuit of what they believe is the nation's best interests. But just as western democracies do not torture, do not launch aggressive wars, do not spy upon their own people or imprison them by the millions, they most assuredly do not create and support extremist groups and instigate acts of terror and chaos to advance authoritarian agendas.

It is indeed unfortunate that the general public is prey to these disturbing theories, which breed such a widespread distrust of the noble intentions and essential (if occasionally misguided or incompentently executed) goodness of our leading men and women. However, there is a very reasonable explanation for the credence given to these fringe beliefs:

They happen to be true.

Continued at:
http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/3/1650-security-blanket-western-democracy-and-the-strategy-of-tension.html