It's possible that religious jihadism played a role in these attacks--just not in the way this (possibly private) "black flag" operation would have you believe:

"...The letter sent to Leahy contained this message:

We have anthrax.
You die now.

Are you afraid?

Death to America.

Death to Israel.

Allah is great.

By design, those attacks put the American population into a state of intense fear of Islamic terrorism, far more than the 9/11 attacks alone could have accomplished.

Much more important than the general attempt to link the anthrax to Islamic terrorists, there was a specific intent — indispensably aided by ABC News — to link the anthrax attacks to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. In my view, and I’ve written about this several times and in great detail to no avail, the role played by ABC News in this episode is the single greatest, unresolved media scandal of this decade. News of Ivins’ suicide, which means (presumably) that the anthrax attacks originated from Ft. Detrick, adds critical new facts and heightens how scandalous ABC News’ conduct continues to be in this matter..."

"UPDATE II: Ivins' local paper, Frederick News in Maryland, has printed several Letters to the Editor written by Ivins over the years. Though the underlying ideology is a bit difficult to discern, he seems clearly driven by a belief in the need for Christian doctrine to govern our laws and political institutions, with a particular interest in Catholic dogma. He wrote things like this:

"Today we frequently admonish people who oppose abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide or capital punishment to keep their religious, moral, and philosophical beliefs to themselves.Before dispensing such admonishments in the future, perhaps we should gratefully consider some of our country's most courageous, historical figures who refused to do so."

And then there's this rather cryptic message, published in 2006:

"Rabbi Morris Kosman is entirely correct in summarily rejecting the demands of the Frederick Imam for a "dialogue."
By blood and faith, Jews are God's chosen, and have no need for "dialogue" with any gentile. End of "dialogue."..."
Salon--Glenn Greenwald

[ 03 August 2008: Message edited by: contrarianna ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Agent 204:
One thing that struck me as a bit odd in this story was the method of suicide. Reportedly he ODed on Tylenol 3s. Now the thing about this is, if the codeine kills you, great, but if it doesn't, the Tylenol will kill you much more slowly (your liver shuts down). Not a nice way to go, and a biologist would know that.

---

Arguably, he would also know with sufficient Ty 3's, the codeine would render him unconscious, and then dead, before he would have to worry about slow death.
Yet there is certainly room for suspicion, especially considering the timing according to the Washington Post:

"Scientist Set to Discuss Plea Bargain In Deadly Attacks Commits Suicide
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, August 2, 2008; A01
....
"Investigators were so certain about the connection that they had scheduled a meeting for last Tuesday with Ivins's attorneys to discuss a plea bargain that would have sent the scientist to prison for life but spared him a death sentence, according to sources briefed on the government's case. But barely two hours before the meeting was to occur, Ivins died of an overdose of Tylenol that he had ingested over the weekend, the sources added. The death was ruled a suicide...."

It could have just been the strain, but 2 hours before a life-saving plea bargain? Even if what he had to say did not directly implicate players in the propaganda campaign, any sustained focus on his statements of motivation and result would be very bad news for some in this election year.

The main strength of Greenwald's journalism (linked in 1st post) is to document the orchestrated disinformation from the media (most telling is ABC news) and officials suggestng Iraq was the source:

"After all, three days later, McCain and Joe Lieberman went on Meet the Press (on October 21, 2001) and both strongly suggested that we would have to attack Iraq. Lieberman said that the anthrax was so complex and potent that "there's either a significant amount of money behind this, or this is state-sponsored, or this is stuff that was stolen from the former Soviet program."

The FBI is about to conclude their "investigation", but the major role of the anthrax attacks had in marshaling public support for attacking Iraq by the media-government axis is largely forgotten 7 years after the fact.

Here, for example, is the most popular "intellectual" neoconservative pundit, Christopher Hitchens, banging the drum for the Iraq war based using anthrax fear in 2001 :

"Meanwhile, it must stop issuing false assurances about the safety of the
home front. (Or "the homeland" as we are now supposed to call it.) It is
ridiculous to suggest, for example, that the anthrax assault may have come
from some domestic disgruntled nut; a Timothy McVeigh with a germ
laboratory. What are the odds that such a person was all ready to rock and
roll just in the aftermath of 11 September, while refraining from issuing
any statement and while operating from the same two states - Florida and
New Jersey - that were the stamping-grounds of the hijackers?"

But the role of the media was much more factually complicit. ABC continues to sheild its "multiple confirming sources" that swore to a total fabrication that tested samples of the anthrax proved the presence of "bentonite" (a supposed "smoking gun" of Sadaam's bioweapons labs).

Here is the beginning of the most recent Greenwald piece:

quote:

---

Sunday Aug. 3, 2008 07:26 EDT
Journalists, their lying sources, and the anthrax investigation

(updated below - Update II - Update III)

The death of government scientist Bruce Ivins has generated far more questions about the anthrax attacks than it has answered. I want to return to the role the establishment media played in obfuscating the anthrax investigation for so long and, at times, aiding in what was clearly the deliberate deceit on the part of Government sources. This is yet another case where the establishment media possesses -- yet steadfastly conceals -- some of the most critical facts about what the Government has done, and insists on protecting the wrongdoers. Obtaining these answers from these media outlets is as important as obtaining them from the Government. Writing about ABC's dissemination of the false Iraq/anthrax story, The New Republic's Dayo Olopade wrote yesterday: "Pressure on ABC to out their sources should be swift and sustained."

The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum argued yesterday that despite the need for journalists to use confidential sources, "the profession -- and the rest of us -- [are] better off if sources know that they run the risk of being unmasked if their mendacity is egregious enough to become newsworthy in its own right." Drum added: "I'd say that part of [Ross'] re-reporting ought to include a full explanation of exactly who was peddling the bentonite lie in the first place, and why they were doing it." Nonetheless, Drum said: "In practice, most journalists refuse to identify their sources under any circumstances at all, even when it's clear that those sources deliberately lied to them."

---

Journalists...

[ 03 August 2008: Message edited by: contrarianna ]