Graeme Macqueen | Akateeminen Kirjakauppa

The 2001 anthrax letter attacks in the United States killed five people andwounded dozens. They were widely blamed on extremist Muslims andtheir backers and used to support the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.They were also used to justify and hasten the passage of the USAPATRIOT Act, which was being presented to Congress just as the firstanthrax victim grew ill.In October 2001, one of the hypotheses that gained ground was that ofthe Double Perpetrator, the claim that al-Qaeda was carrying out theattacks with the support of Iraq. Much evidence was put forth to supportthis Double Perpetrator hypothesis but independent scientists soondiscovered that the anthrax spores came from a domestic lab in the USserving the military and intelligence communities, not from al-Qaeda orIraq.The FBI then quickly claimed that an individual was responsible for theattacks and began noisily looking for this "lone wolf." In 2008 the Bureaunamed Dr. Bruce Ivins of the US Army Medical Institute of InfectiousDisease as the "anthrax killer." Although the FBI remains committed tothe Ivins hypothesis, the case has been disintegrating for the last threeyears. Currently, it is justly held in contempt not merely by scientists whoworked with Ivins but by many journalists as well as several US senators.But this raises the question: if Ivins did not commit this crime, who did?This book presents evidence to support the following points: (a) The anthrax attacks were carried out by a group of perpetrators, notby a "lone wolf." The attacks were, therefore, the result of a conspiracy-by definition a plan by two or more people, made in secret and resultingin an immoral or illegal act.(b) The group that carried out this crime consisted, in whole or in part, ofinsiders deep within the US state apparatus.(c) These insiders were the same people who planned the 9/11 attacks(d) The anthrax attacks were meant to facilitate a seizure of power by theexecutive branch of government through intimidation of Congress andUS civil society. They were also designed to achieve public acquiescenceto and support for the redefinition of US foreign policy, replacing the ColdWar with a new and aggressive global conflict framework, the Global Waron Terror