Subsequent to the first documented case of anthrax infection at American Media Incorporated in Boca Raton, Florida, a handful of other cases and scores of false alarms have occurred throughout the country. “White powdery substance” has suddenly become America’s terrifying new bugaboo; in my own region—and just in the last 24 hours—the discovery of unidentified powder has grounded an airliner, caused three consecutive evacuations of the post office, and lit up the 911 banks with the calls of frightened people who don’t want to be alarmists, but who also don’t want to die.
False alarms are inevitable, and perhaps even understandable. The nation is frightened. We’re still doing remarkably well at going about our business…but we’re more wary than we’ve ever been. And short of altering our lives to the point that the terrorists win, the wariness makes sense. It is simply inexcusable, in the strange new world that has emerged since the Eleventh of September, to not exercise caution in all we do. That includes, unfortunately, the once-mundane task of opening our mail.
What concerns me much more than all this, has been the automatic assumption that Bin Laden and al-Qaeda are responsible for the anthrax attacks. Bush, Cheney and Ashcroft have all but said so. Certainly, this reprehensible terrorist organization should be considered a suspect, if for no other reason than the fact that we are at war with them at present. But it would be tunnel-vision of the most damaging kind to not cast a penetrating eye on the myriad of other groups or individuals who might be responsible.
Consider the facts: the anthrax attacks have thus far targeted American media, Congress and Microsoft. It’s clear that such targets might claim a place somewhere on Bin Laden’s hit list. But would they be primary targets? When al-Qaeda initiated a new breed of terrorism—that of using civilian airliners as weapons of mass destruction—they chose targets of the highest profile. Would they not do likewise in their first foray into bioterrorism? Would their attacks not be designed for the maximum number of casualties? I do not pretend—nor would I want—to understand the mind of a creature like Bin Laden. But as a military historian I am trained to both analyze strategy and to recognize behavior patterns. Every instinct I possess is telling me that we must look elsewhere for the culprits.
Go To Page: 1 2
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Patrick Worden's History of Flight topic, please visit the Discussions page.