|| I know I'll regret asking this, but if you have a jar of the nasty stuff
|| sitting on the shelf, how much preparation does it take to send
|| out a bunch of envelopes? So the inside job makes sense, but
|| foreknowledge is not a necessary inference.
You and I are not experts in these things so it pays to read the report,
like where it says you have to get vaccinated to handle the stuff, which is
apparently a bit more complicated than just popping down to the drugstore,
especially if you're keen on not having the vaccine order traced back to
you. There could be other, classified reasons having to do with weaponizing,
behind Ms. Rosenberg's question about whether or not the perp had advance
knowledge. I'm just completing the train of thought that she prudently left
hanging. . . .
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you handle the stuff professionally you could be vacinnated, so once again foreknowledge of 9/11 is not a necessary inference.
As an anti-Iraqi plot, this (either 9/11 or the anthrax) would be quite a botch. Evidently, no footprints have been left to pin it on Saddam. Just some coffee klatsch in Germany. Nor do you see a concerted effort to do so in official circles; only an identifiable faction of limited size is pushing the Iraqi invasion policy.
Regrettably, there is not enough here to fuel my well-developed tendency to paranoia. And I know you wanted there to be . . .
mbs