Taking the above letter sent by the Director of the Center for Disease Control to a Congressmen in 1995 -- taking this letter at face value it means that we, the United States of America, are the ones who sold biological Weapons of Mass Destruction to Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

The shocking facts in this news is bad enough, the 'red herrings,' are even worse.

One of the reasons given for the War in Iraq, besides the false links to 9/11 and the false accusations of Saddam having nuclear weapons of mass destruction but also that Saddam had biological weapons of mass destruction --- biological weapons of mass destruction that we sold him.

It reminds one of the classic cartoon from Pogo:

It's amazing to think, especially considering all the guilt that was thrown on Saddam for gassing the Kurds, that we were the ones who sold him the poison weapons.

Saddam even claimed that he checked with the U.S. State Dept. before invading Kuwait, had a meeting with the U.S. Ambassador on July 25th, 1990, and was told by the U.S. Ambassador, “We have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflict, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.”

The U.S. Ambassador then left to go on vacation. Saddam's invasion of Kuwait began eight days after this meeting.

When Iraq released a transcript of the meeting, the Administration said the Iraqi document was incomplete and misleading and Ambassador April Glaspie didn't have permission to go on vacation.

In that July 1990 meeting is seemed that Saddam was concerned about what he saw as U.S. efforts to drive down the price of oil. He said that oil at $25.00 a barrel was not an unreasonable price and said that efforts to drive it down to $12.00 a barrel would cripple his country's economy. (Note: oil, is now $125.00 a barrel)

Saddam also objected to what he saw as U.S. efforts to manipulate and gain control of Arab oil, and growing talk in some circles of leadership in the United States for the need for "regime change," in Iraq, claiming he felt he was becoming a target of possible U.S. aggression, Iraq transcript of this meeting.

It's not the intention of this editorial to defend dictators but it is the intention of this editorial to say our hands are not as clean as our government would pretend and it's a lawyer's cliche to point out "there are no open and shut cases."

The issue of Kuwait and Western conquest and colonialism go back to the 19th century, for example and we are certainly meddling in their backyard, not the other way around.

More than 24,000 hits on Goggle on this one meeting can be found, here.  One thing strikes me as clear, nobody every got up and shoke their fist in Saddam's face and said: "If you invade Kuwait, that means war!" like you might see in the movies or hope would be firmly conveyed.

It also seems clear that it was not a good time for the Iraq Ambassador to go on vacation. Nero fiddling while Rome burned is less of a story, even considering the rumors and plots that may have been involved in that (greed for real estate).

A massive amount of spin and filtered perceptions were launched simultaneously  with this news about Bruce Ivins , but for now...

The only honest headline is:
Scientist in anthrax case dead

That's the way it was reported in this world news this weekend and in the YouTube report featured below.

Any false attempts to make this now appear as an "open and shut," case (after seven years) should be treated with appropriate skepticism. Just the fact the FBI called upon this sceintist to help the bureau with its analysis of the wispy powder used in the attacks makes it more complex than "open and shut."

Although it was certainly fair enough and part of the story to say: "It was an apparent suicide." it could also have been murder. Such plots have been part of reality and popular fiction for all of time, hundreds and hundreds of years before Shakespeare and hundreds of years since.

YouTube report

As this Reuters brief report concludes: "Many questions remain unanswered."

Besides referring to the actually smoked fish, the term 'red herrings,' means info that is intended to be misleading.

Red herrings dragged across a trail would throw hunting animals off the track because the strong smell of the fish would wipe out the scent of the fleeing animal or villain.

Evil villains trying to cover their tracks or blame someone else is part of human nature.

So far there have been perplexing stories talking about the suspect being a "Family Man," here.  That he was a "quiet, giving kind of guy," here. Not to mention that he played the organ in church and was a Red Cross volunteer, here.

There has even been this incredible spin:  The suspect dedicated his life to help protect us from biological weapons of mass destruction. If he was responsible for the anthrax attacks it was probably only intended to to alter the public to the dangers of anthrax. He may not even have realized how deadly the strain of virus was (although, actually, that was his job for 18 years).

But these spins on the story don't make sense and soon there was a shift to claim we were victims of a "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," type character.

With quite surprising rapidity (considering all the info from the FBI investigation is sealed) information is now revealed indicating the "brilliant," scientist had a dark side, a very dark side.

A tape is being played where a social worker says in Maryland District Court, just one week before Ivin's death, that: "Dr. Ivins’s psychiatrist had “called him homicidal, sociopathic with clear intentions.” Other reports have also quickly surfaced where other unidentified " top psychiatrist," describe Ivins as a a sociopathic, homicidal killer, details.

But if a social worker could get access to Dr. Ivin's psychiatic records why didn't the FBI know about all this sooner? Why, if it dates back to his days in grad scool, didn't the military know about it before he was hired to work on dangerous biological weapons programs?

After all, a homicidal sociopath is not the type of person who should be hired for our germ warfare programs . A homicidial sociopath with access to the unique deadly bioloical weapons used in these attacks also, it would seem, be a prime suspect long before seven years went by.

(These biological warfare programs, by the way, we're not suppose to admit having  -- but programs alleged only to be for defensive purposes; although the letter included here from the Center for Disease Control proves that to be just another lie. Not only do we have such programs but we sell the biologtical weapons to others, even to Saddam Hussein himself!)

Additionally, tangential to this case, information now being exposed about the decades of disasters that have plagued the community where the germ warfare research is conducted is truly frightening, here.

Information also now being exposed about the way money was given out and contracts handled under the Project BioShield Act of 2004 are scandalous, scandalous, that is, if you find the awarding of a nearly 1 billion dollar No-Bid contract to just one company, Vaxgen, with a 'confidential clause,' in the contract that says nobody can talk about it, AND that this company failed to produce anything worthwhile, and had not ever put a single dose of any vaccine on the market. here.

Forgetting all the spins it really is shocking news that a suspect in the anthrax attacks of 2001 -- biological attacks that helped feed the frenzy leading to war -- it's shocking that now it turns out that the was working for our government!?

Plus, not only was he working for our own government but was a leading part of the team that was investigating these anthrax attacks!

This is a tale worse that popular fiction and, of course, we're suppose to believe there was no plot or government involvement or intentions.

But consider this (as well as the photo of the letter from the Center of Disease Control) that's also in this week's Political Action News were ongoing developments in the case that implicates White House advisor Karl Rove and others with influencing the hiring policies of the Justice Department and using the Justice Department to target their political enemies and protect their political friends.

One of the victims of this White House plot was the Governor of Alabama who was convicted of corruption charges and sent to jail; although now, under unusual circumstances, he has been released.

The sending of a former Democratic governor to jail on distorted charges is like another plot worse that popular fiction and, of course, we're not suppose to believe such a thing could happen here.

Maybe if there weren't such stories side-by-side, one after the other, it might be more plausible to not have suspicions about bad government intent and actions.

All this make it clear how imperative it is to vote for better leaders, kick out the bad ones. and hold political criminals, murderers and those who deliberate lied to lead us into false wars responsible for their actions.

It's not the intention of this editorial to whip up unfounded conspiracy theories.

Some in the "indy media," have already laid out the bare bones of what conspiracy to incite war could be involved here, Conspiracy theory details.

It seems a pretty straightforward plausible theory, wihout much hype or overblow rhetoric, written by someone who had questions about al this from the day it began.

One thing, though, when the author refers to "terrorist," he doesn't mean Saddam Hussein or al-Qaeda, he means those who are spreading terror and work for our own government, those who are committed to making war no matter the lies they have to spread, the truth that needs cover-up or the cost involved.

With these facts now before us, it bears repeating:

"We have met the enemy and he is us."

Or maybe all this was just a simple case of greed, whether it's selling anthrax to Saddam or sending it through the mail. No big conspiracies, no elaborate plans, just plain old greed. Greed is the root of all evil, isn't it?  

Germ warfare scientist Bruce Ivins stood to make "tens of thousands of dollars," perhaps, over the course of several years, perhaps, if this dastardly plans went undetected, perhaps. Maybe this is the motive and explanation, were suppose to believe?

We're also suppose to believe that a man who goes out and buys a bullet-proof vest and a gun is intending suicide, although that wouldn't make sense. Of course, though, we are told, the suspect was "unstable." Of course, we are told, he was acting alone and now the case can be closed.

Of course the military was not involved even though the anthrax came from one of their labs. Of course, too, this had nothing to do with our rush to war in Iraq. And, of course, none of this has anything to do with Oil, or other Middle East considerations.

We have met the enemy....