Skip to main content

View Diary: UK Weapons Inspector was Writing Biowarfare Bombshell Prior to Suspicious Death (54 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Is there a reasonable alternative to the obvious (9+ / 0-)

    assumption?

    Who had the means and inclination to do such a thing, other than the CIA?

    I ask that not facetiously, but seriously - is there any other possibility?  Because I'm struggling to think of another scenario that would be plausible...

    Republicans criticizing Democrats on torture is like a bunch of foxes complaining that the henhouse wasn't well guarded enough.

    by ShadowSD on Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 04:54:02 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Well (14+ / 0-)

      Who had the means, motive, and opportunity to carry out the attacks? Who benefited from the attacks politically?  How did the timing of the attacks facilitate the emphasis on the public perception of the plausibility of the WMD argument before the invasion of Iraq? How plausible is the government's case that a single person who conveniently committed suicide before being named as the primary suspect single-handedly stole and carried out the attacks without arousing suspicion and contamination (while the FBI was focused on someone else despite no evidence to support their case after numerous property searches)? What companies have benefited from the funding generated to address bioterrorism threats, diverting from far more pressing public health threats.

      A few more inconvenient truths: The Bush administration tortured to obtain false confessions linking Iraq to al Qaeda. The Bush administration lied about the threat posed by Iraq. The Bush administration outed a CIA agent because her husband questioned the veracity of claims about Iraq acquiring uranium from Niger. The Bush administration spent trillions to invade and occupy Iraq, generating over 4000 US soldiers killed in theatre and hundreds of thousands with physical or psychological injuries.  

      It may be circumstantial, but there are far too many pieces that have no plausible alternative.

      The uninsured keep dying

      by DWG on Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 05:19:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  My point exactly (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cotterperson, Josiah Bartlett, DWG

        I'm trying hard not to put on a tinfoil hat and say "it's was Bush's CIA!" with absolute certainty, given no direct evidence of something that would be criminal, but everything points to the same place, and there are no reasonable alternatives at all.  No reasonable alternatives, if that determination holds up, means no reasonable doubt.

        Republicans criticizing Democrats on torture is like a bunch of foxes complaining that the henhouse wasn't well guarded enough.

        by ShadowSD on Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 05:27:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  careful with those assumptions (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ShadowSD

        Yes, many corporations benefited greatly from Cheney's administration. As did many politicians. And a lot of people in the so-called media. But you can't seriously believe that it was a grand conspiracy amongst them all.

        It could very well have been someone at CIA. Or at Ft. Detrick. Or MI6. But that doesn't mean that anyone in the administration need be involved. All it takes is one True Believer who knows just how the administration would react. That there were many beneficiaries in no way proves any of them were at all involved.

        "They're telling us something we don't understand"
        General Charles de Gaulle, Mai '68

        by subtropolis on Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 11:57:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The CIA is more than ready if not eager to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cotterperson, Josiah Bartlett

      please whichever party that is in power..Whether it be fragging, disinformation or mailing out anthrax..This is still the same CIA of the 60s, 70s experimenting with LSD and who knows what the hell else on the citizens of the U.S. and gawd knows how many brown captives..For this "Service" the CIA seems to get carte blanche for drug smuggling and such, this is why the war on drugs is unwinnable..CIA profit center..JFK was going to "Break the CIA into a million pieces", and we know the rest of the story..There is way to G'damn much secrecy in oue so-called open democracy and it only get s worse

      If I just had one day when I wasnt all confused

      by FuzzyDice on Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 07:17:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  M16? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bebacker

      The British Secret Intelligence Service? Just posing an option, since Blair was so deep into the lies. It's not much different, though, is it?

    •  Someone who wanted to stimulate spending (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BlackSheep1, bebacker, ShadowSD

      Look at all the pricvate companies making money off this.

      The anthrax attack started a boom in bioweapons research.

      Cui bono indeed.

      Democracy needs accountability. Investigate and prosecute the Torture Thirteen.

      by Mimikatz on Tue Jul 07, 2009 at 10:52:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site