Anthrax Missing From Army Lab
Ed Lake
letters that killed 5 people, but this story in today's
Hartford Courant does show how anthax could disappear from
a secure lab in America:
http://www.ctnow.com/news/specials/hc-detrick0120.artjan20.story?coll=hc%2Dheadlines%2Dhome
If the link is too long and doesn't work, you can also
find it on my anthrax web site:
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/ at the very bottom of
the References section.
Ed
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Ed Lake" <det...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:3C4B0F5D...@newsguy.com...
Ed Lake
The point of the post was merely to show how easily an American
scientist could take anthrax out of a U.S. government lab. I stated
that in the text.
I don't think the anthrax used in the letter attacks was taken from
Ft. Detrick way back in 1991 or 1992. I think it was taken from a
different government lab a lot more recently, where the security
procedures were pretty much the same as they were at Ft. Detrick. At
both places it was next to impossible to get something INTO the lab,
but a scientist could easily get something OUT OF the lab.
Ed
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
Don't you think stealing "sterile" anthrax from a military
installation would be a lot easier than stealing "active"
anthrax? Don't you think the latter would be protected better?
Of course it would Ed. That is why I pointed out that your were
talking about "sterile" anthrax and not active anthrax.
Also, Ed, do you have a single shred of evidence, I mean *real*
evidence to support your "right-wingers sent the anthrax" hare
brained theories? There are volumes of evidence that supports
the terrorists sending the anthrax; documents found in Kabul,
Atta asking about crop dusting aircraft, Atta showing up in a
Florida pharmacy asking for a cure for skin infections, etc....
But where is the single shred of evidence that supports your
theories that "right wingers" or some mad scientist is to blame?
The fact is Ed that there is NO evidence that supports your
theories, other than your own self-serving political agenda.
Remember right after 9/11 what the Osama/Taliban tried to claim?
They also blamed the WTC attack on American "right wingers."
That clearly was their cover story. Then when the truth started
to come out about the hijackers they quickly changed their tune
to "Israeli Agents did it." The terrorists know that even their
own people would never condone the use of a biological agent
against innocent people. They also know that if we prove they
used the anthrax that will enable us to retaliate against Iraq or
other countries that helped to provide the anthrax.
So the distortions, hype and propaganda continues from all anti
right zelots and pro-terrorists that the Al Qaeda et al
terrorists did not send the anthrax. Everyone is being blamed
except the obvious ones....which are members of the Al Qaeda,
Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezzbolah, Iraqi Intelligence gang of goons
that have conspired together to attack and slaughter innocent
people all over the world.
The Al Quaeda "spin" that Americans/Israelis/Men from Mars are to
blame will not stick Ed.
I also suspect the FBI already knows the sender was an Al Qaeda
operative. They are just making sure the original source was not
furnished Al Qaeda from an American Installation before they make
this fact known to the public. Moreover, politically, they need
to keep this information quiet until our military is in place to
do something about it. Because once the truth is known about
this issue, the hue and cry from the American population will be
such that an attack on Iraq will be impossible to avoid.
Doug Grant (Tm)
"Ed Lake" <det...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:3C4EDB41...@newsguy.com...
Ed Lake
> Ed.
>
> Don't you think stealing "sterile" anthrax from a military
> installation would be a lot easier than stealing "active"
> anthrax? Don't you think the latter would be protected better?
> Of course it would Ed. That is why I pointed out that your were
> talking about "sterile" anthrax and not active anthrax.
>
> Also, Ed, do you have a single shred of evidence, I mean *real*
> evidence to support your "right-wingers sent the anthrax" hare
> brained theories? There are volumes of evidence that supports
> the terrorists sending the anthrax; documents found in Kabul,
> Atta asking about crop dusting aircraft, Atta showing up in a
> Florida pharmacy asking for a cure for skin infections, etc....
> But where is the single shred of evidence that supports your
> theories that "right wingers" or some mad scientist is to blame?
>
> The fact is Ed that there is NO evidence that supports your
> theories, other than your own self-serving political agenda.
(snip)
Doug,
The evidence supporting my "theory" is on my web page at
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
As I've stated before, there is NO evidence that the anthrax letters
were mailed by Al Qaeda or Iraq. You just have that notion in your
mind and adjust whatever facts you find to fit to your theory.
The reward for identifying the anthrax terrorists has been raised to
$2.5 million. Check the FBI's press release for who they think did
it:
http://newark.fbi.gov/contact/fo/newark/pressrel/2002/pr012302.htm
Ed
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
>
> As I've stated before, there is NO evidence that the anthrax
letters
> were mailed by Al Qaeda or Iraq. You just have that notion in
your
> mind and adjust whatever facts you find to fit to your theory.
>
Ed, you are forgetting the documents found in the Kabul houses,
the sworn testimony of the Florida pharmacist and the sworn
testimony of those that identified Atta as the person inquiring
about crop dusting aircraft...you are also forgetting about the
letters howling "Death to America" Death to Israel, etc... and
the anthrax attack coinciding with the 9/11 attacks and the
threats made by Osama Bin Fruitcake.
Now please provide us with one *shred* of real evidence you have
that *in any manner* indicates a "right wing conspiracy" or a
"mad scientist" sent the anthrax. Well, we are waiting....dum
de dum....waiting.....dum de dum.....All I hear is crickets
chirping Ed. There is no *evidence* on your web page Ed - just
self-serving conjecture that you have curve-fitted to your own
political agenda....not one shred of evidence exists to support
your claims Ed. Not a shred.
Doug Grant (Tm)
> Ed
>
Ed Lake
Doug,
Documents found in Kabul houses prove only that the Al Qaeda was
thinking about bioweapons attacks among the many many other schemes
they had. They don't prove that they actually had the anthrax to
carry out such an attack, much less that they did it.
The fact that some terrorist had a case of the sniffles does NOT mean
he had been playing around with anthrax. That is just plain nuts.
Experts have said that crop dusting aircraft are no good for
spreading anthrax.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/background/anthrax.html The
terrorists could have been considering crop dusters for some chemical
attack. You just assume it was anthrax.
The anthrax attacks did NOT coincide with the 9-11 attack. They came
1 week and 4 weeks later. Thousands of hoax attacks came from other
Americans during the two months after 9-11. Many people were
arrested. And they all had their own motives. The only difference
between the hoax attacks and the real anthrax attack is that the
American scientists had anthrax available to use. The hoaxers
didn't.
I've never said the anthrax attack was the result of any "right wing
conspiracy".
The "solid" evidence that the person behind the anthrax attacks are
American scientists is in the news nearly every day: DNA tests have
shown that the anthrax came Ft. Detrick, MD. or one of the facilities
to which Ft. Detrick furnished samples. There has been report after
report showing how anthrax could have been removed from those
facilities. There have been reports showing how stupid scientists
can be on some subject while being brilliant on others.
The anthrax letters clearly indicate that the terrorists did not want
anyone to die as a result of their attack. The first letters told
the recipients to take penicillin. The second letters told the
recipients that the powder was anthrax. Does that sound like an Al
Qaeda attack to you?
The FBI says the terrorist is "likely to have a scientific
background/work history which may include a specific familiarity with
anthrax." Also, "this individual has a comfort level in and around
the Trenton, NJ area due to present or prior association." That
quote comes from the FBI:
http://newark.fbi.gov/contact/fo/newark/pressrel/2002/pr012302.htm
That would seem to rule out your theory that the terrorists are total
idiots who do things that harm their own cause, who can't even write
intelligently, but who can still refine anthrax into spores so small
that other scientists didn't believe it was possible.
I'm fairly certain that the FBI knows who the terrorists are, but
they don't have a solid case to take to court. That's why they are
still looking for help from the public.
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
"Ed Lake" <det...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:3C502B38...@newsguy.com...
Ed, the documents found in Kabul *specifically* stated anthrax,
and the variety of ways to deploy it. Dozens of high level
meetings were conducted on anthrax and its possible deployment as
weapon. These high level meetings were held on several occasions
spanning a period of over two years!
Think about it Ed. Would you hold dozens of high level meetings
discussing ways and methods for delivering a weapon that "you did
not possess?!" Your logic baffles me Ed... it is like you have
a hidden agenda here to blame it on some group that you
personally dislike. Accept the facts as they are Ed, at least
try to appear objective.
> The fact that some terrorist had a case of the sniffles does
NOT mean
> he had been playing around with anthrax. That is just plain
nuts.
Ed, if he just had a case of the "sniffles" as you put it, why
would he pressure a pharmacists for specific antibiotics?
Moreover, why would he not simply go to a doctor and get his cure
for the sniffles, as the doctor clearly would not have any reason
to turn the "sniffles" over to the authorities. But once again,
you are missing the point. In fact Mohammad Atta did not have
the "sniffles." His partner was the one suffering from the
inhalation anthrax. Atta had a severe skin infection all over
his hands....but strange as it sounds BOTH Atta and his lung
infected friend asked for the same antibiotic? Both of these
terrorists showed signs of having skin anthrax and inhalation
anthrax, and both asked for the same antibiotic, and both were
afraid to go to a doctor for a prescription. This evidence can
hardly be dismissed as nothing more than the "sniffles" Ed.
> Experts have said that crop dusting aircraft are no good for
> spreading anthrax.
That is abject nonsense as crop dusting aircraft can certainly
spread the agent, although not as efficiently as other means.
But then that makes my point. Atta investigated crop dusting
aircraft, yet although he could have he did not rent or lease any
of them. He obviously found a better way to deliver his anthrax.
The
> terrorists could have been considering crop dusters for some
chemical
> attack. You just assume it was anthrax.
The point is Ed they were clearly considering spreading some type
of agent. They were looking for a means to deliver their weapon.
The documents in Kabul demonstrate clearly they were discussing
delivering anthrax. Now anthrax WAS delivered as a weapon. Now
you want us to ignore all of that evidence, and now believe the
terrorists had some other type of chemical or biological agent to
deliver, and the anthrax attack was all just a big coincidence?
Sorry Ed, that Pig won't grunt.
>
> The anthrax attacks did NOT coincide with the 9-11 attack.
They came
> 1 week and 4 weeks later. Thousands of hoax attacks came from
other
> Americans during the two months after 9-11. Many people were
> arrested. And they all had their own motives. The only
difference
> between the hoax attacks and the real anthrax attack is that
the
> American scientists had anthrax available to use. The hoaxers
> didn't.
Ed, please, the anthrax attack came within one week after the
9/11 attacks. The anthrax attack *clearly* coincided with the
9/11 attack. One week time frame certainly would associate the
two attacks by anyone's rational thought process. Moreover, the
motives stated by the senders of the anthrax were the same as the
terrorists: "Death to Israel" and "Death to America." (Also, no
one is sure there was not an earlier letter sent to Florida that
was discarded. The anthrax was spread too heavy and over too
much of an area in the building in Florida to all come from a
single letter.)
Also you only know when the envelopes were mailed, not when they
were addressed or the anthrax inserted. They probably were
prepared before the 9/11 attacks, and were mailed out later by a
confederate or an ususpecting aquaitance or even a mail service.
The hoaxes did not start until *after* the anthrax attack Ed.
And there is not a single shred of evidence anywhere that links
any "mad scientists" to the sending of the anthrax. Yet there is
tons of evidence that links the terrorists to the anthrax
possession and delivery.
> I've never said the anthrax attack was the result of any "right
wing
> conspiracy".
Hmmmmm. I read several of your answers to posters in which you
said just the opposite. Shall I retrieve them for you Ed?
>
> The "solid" evidence that the person behind the anthrax attacks
are
> American scientists is in the news nearly every day: DNA tests
have
> shown that the anthrax came Ft. Detrick, MD. or one of the
facilities
> to which Ft. Detrick furnished samples. There has been report
after
> report showing how anthrax could have been removed from those
> facilities. There have been reports showing how stupid
scientists
> can be on some subject while being brilliant on others.
Ed, "reports" "self-serving opinions" and conjecture is not
"evidence." You do not have a single shred of evidence, not a
shred, not a connecting thread, nothing whatsoever that indicates
in any manner that a "mad scientist" is behind the sending of the
anthrax. Not to mention a "mad scientist" that writes just like
a middle easterner, uses dates like a European, and is a
"scientist" but is too stupid not to know that his anthrax would
leak out of his envelopes and that US Senators and US Media
Celebrities DO NOT OPEN THEIR OWN MAIL! HAHAHAHAHHA. Forgive me
for laughing Ed, but your "scientist" theory is worse than your
"right wingers did it" theory.
>
> The anthrax letters clearly indicate that the terrorists did
not want
> anyone to die as a result of their attack. The first letters
told
> the recipients to take penicillin. The second letters told the
> recipients that the powder was anthrax. Does that sound like
an Al
> Qaeda attack to you?
Yes Ed, it sounds exactly like terrorism. The purpose of
terrorism is to instill terror not necessarily to kill.
Moreover, clearly the writer was probably being facetious. He
did not expect the reader to believe him. But he was stupid
enough to think that US Senators open their own mail.
Moreover, he also was so dumb he did not know the anthrax would
leak through the pores of his envelopes. He certainly did not
want the leak as he taped up the corners of the envelopes. Let
me see now Ed, he writes like a child with a 2nd grade education,
he does not know that US Senators and US Media Cleb's do not open
their own mail, and he did not know his anthrax would leak out of
the envelopes he purchased....yet he is some brilliant mad
scientist with access to not just one stockpile of anthrax but
TWO completely different stockpiles! ARRRRRRGHHHHHHHH. Ed,
please.
>
> The FBI says the terrorist is "likely to have a scientific
> background/work history which may include a specific
familiarity with
> anthrax." Also, "this individual has a comfort level in and
around
> the Trenton, NJ area due to present or prior association."
That
> quote comes from the FBI:
Ed, that is nothing more than early speculation. And since when
does the FBI publish what they really know? On the contrary,
that information should be evidence of what the suspect is not -
not what he could be! The only thing the FBI is saying now is
that they believe the perpetrator lives or works in or around
middle or north New Jersey. Now how many lab's or installations
produce anthrax in middle or North New Jersey Ed? Answer: NONE!
> That would seem to rule out your theory that the terrorists are
total
> idiots who do things that harm their own cause, who can't even
write
> intelligently, but who can still refine anthrax into spores so
small
> that other scientists didn't believe it was possible.
Ed, they certainly did not harm their cause, which was to strike
fear in Americans. Of course they succeeded - and I am amazed
you are denying that Americans were not terrified of receiving
anthrax in their mail. Moreover, the sender of the anthrax
clearly was not the person that developed it nor refined it.
That is almost impossible for a single individual to do,
especially two different types of anthrax. Clearly that material
was produced and refined by a very sophisticated laboratory, such
as exists in Iraq. The moron that sent the anthrax had nothing
to do with the development of the agent Ed, that fact is clear.
> I'm fairly certain that the FBI knows who the terrorists are,
but
> they don't have a solid case to take to court. That's why they
are
> still looking for help from the public.
>
Say Ed, which crystal ball are you using this time support your
above statement? You have absolutely not a shred of evidence to
support your conclusions, not to mention your hare brained
conclusion that the FBI already knows who sent the
anthrax.....that is just plain goofy Ed....
Doug Grant (Tm)
> Ed
>
Ed Lake
> Think about it Ed. Would you hold dozens of high level meetings
> discussing ways and methods for delivering a weapon that "you did
> not possess?!"
Doug,
I wouldn't do it, but it's done all the time in governments and in
agencies like the CIA. They hash out wild plans for years, dumping
99 percent of them before finally going ahead with one.
> > Experts have said that crop dusting aircraft are no good for
> > spreading anthrax.
>
> That is abject nonsense as crop dusting aircraft can certainly
> spread the agent, although not as efficiently as other means.
> But then that makes my point. Atta investigated crop dusting
> aircraft, yet although he could have he did not rent or lease any
> of them. He obviously found a better way to deliver his anthrax.
>
A better way? Sending it to the media and telling them to take
penicillin so they wouldn't get sick?
>
> The
> > terrorists could have been considering crop dusters for some
> chemical
> > attack. You just assume it was anthrax.
>
> The point is Ed they were clearly considering spreading some type
> of agent. They were looking for a means to deliver their weapon.
Right. But they had no anthrax. They were looking for a delivery
system for whatever deadly chemical they could obtain. They were
also checking into getting licenses to drive tanker trucks with
hazardous substances. That's more likely what they planned to use.
> > I've never said the anthrax attack was the result of any "right
> wing
> > conspiracy".
>
> Hmmmmm. I read several of your answers to posters in which you
> said just the opposite. Shall I retrieve them for you Ed?
>
Don't bother. You won't find I said anything like that, but you'll
find something you can inaccurately interpret that way - just as you
interpret everything else.
> Ed, "reports" "self-serving opinions" and conjecture is not
> "evidence." You do not have a single shred of evidence, not a
> shred, not a connecting thread, nothing whatsoever that indicates
> in any manner that a "mad scientist" is behind the sending of the
> anthrax.
> If this is a wild theory, then how come it's the theory believed by
> the FBI and the Federation of American Scientists? The scientist
> probably didn't write the letters. Check my web site for
> information on who probably did:
> http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
> >
> > The anthrax letters clearly indicate that the terrorists did
> not want
> > anyone to die as a result of their attack. The first letters
> told
> > the recipients to take penicillin. The second letters told the
> > recipients that the powder was anthrax. Does that sound like
> an Al
> > Qaeda attack to you?
>
> Yes Ed, it sounds exactly like terrorism. The purpose of
> terrorism is to instill terror not necessarily to kill.
> Moreover, clearly the writer was probably being facetious.
Hmmm. So, you're saying that the Al Qaeda had enough anthrax to kill
millions of Americans, but instead they decided to use it all in a
few letters to a couple Democratic Senators because the terrorists
wanted to be facetious?
And you're saying that even though we're bombing the shit out of the
Al Qaeda in Afganistan, they still like their little joke and haven't
used any more of their anthrax? And you think I side with the Al
Qaeda because I think they are murdering bastards who would never
pass up an opportunity to kill thousands of Americans?
> He
> did not expect the reader to believe him. But he was stupid
> enough to think that US Senators open their own mail.
>
> Moreover, he also was so dumb he did not know the anthrax would
> leak through the pores of his envelopes. He certainly did not
> want the leak as he taped up the corners of the envelopes. Let
> me see now Ed, he writes like a child with a 2nd grade education,
> he does not know that US Senators and US Media Cleb's do not open
> their own mail, and he did not know his anthrax would leak out of
> the envelopes he purchased....yet he is some brilliant mad
> scientist with access to not just one stockpile of anthrax but
> TWO completely different stockpiles! ARRRRRRGHHHHHHHH. Ed,
> please.
>
There was only one "stockpile" of anthrax. The scientist spent the
three weeks between Sept. 18 and Oct. 9 refining the anthrax to make
the spores smaller and more deadly.
The idea that there were two stockpiles is nuts. No one believes
that.
> >
> > The FBI says the terrorist is "likely to have a scientific
> > background/work history which may include a specific
> familiarity with
> > anthrax." Also, "this individual has a comfort level in and
> around
> > the Trenton, NJ area due to present or prior association."
> That
> > quote comes from the FBI:
>
> Ed, that is nothing more than early speculation. And since when
> does the FBI publish what they really know? On the contrary,
> that information should be evidence of what the suspect is not -
> not what he could be! The only thing the FBI is saying now is
> that they believe the perpetrator lives or works in or around
> middle or north New Jersey. Now how many lab's or installations
> produce anthrax in middle or North New Jersey Ed? Answer: NONE!
>
It's hardly "early speculation", since they've been working on it for
over 3 months. And you don't need a lab to develop anthrax. You
just need the anthrax, the equipment (about $2,000 worth) and the
right knowledge.
Ed
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
> "DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN" wrote:
>
> > Think about it Ed. Would you hold dozens of high level
meetings
> > discussing ways and methods for delivering a weapon that "you
did
> > not possess?!"
>
> Doug,
>
> I wouldn't do it, but it's done all the time in governments and
in
> agencies like the CIA. They hash out wild plans for years,
dumping
> 99 percent of them before finally going ahead with one.
Ed, please. The CIA does not discuss plans to use weapons they
*know* they do not possess! That is crazy Ed. Obviously the Al
Qaeda had several high level strategy meetings discussing how
they were going to use their anthrax. They would not have had so
many meetings discussing how to use a weapon they did not
possess.
> > > Experts have said that crop dusting aircraft are no good
for
> > > spreading anthrax.
> >
> > That is abject nonsense as crop dusting aircraft can
certainly
> > spread the agent, although not as efficiently as other means.
> > But then that makes my point. Atta investigated crop dusting
> > aircraft, yet although he could have he did not rent or lease
any
> > of them. He obviously found a better way to deliver his
anthrax.
> >
>
> A better way? Sending it to the media and telling them to take
> penicillin so they wouldn't get sick?
Ed, sending the anthrax through the mails to a specific target is
a means of terrorism. It is better than wasting the anthrax via
a crop duster. The mail means specific individuals can be
targeted for terror. The method of mail delivering anthrax can
be for no other purpose than general terror and cannot be
stopped. Obviously that means of delivery suited the terrorists
purpose better than crop dusters.
>
> >
> > The
> > > terrorists could have been considering crop dusters for
some
> > chemical
> > > attack. You just assume it was anthrax.
> >
> > The point is Ed they were clearly considering spreading some
type
> > of agent. They were looking for a means to deliver their
weapon.
>
> Right. But they had no anthrax. They were looking for a
delivery
> system for whatever deadly chemical they could obtain. They
were
> also checking into getting licenses to drive tanker trucks with
> hazardous substances. That's more likely what they planned to
use.
Ed all of the documents in Kabul say they had and have anthrax.
You say they had none. You do not have a single shred of
evidence to support your claim, I have volumes of documents to
support mine.
As far as the takers go, they were going to use them as bombs Ed.
You know, blow up bridges and similar. If you would read the
captured documents, you would know how they planned to use the
tankers. The crop dusters were to spread anthrax, but they found
a better way.
>
> > > I've never said the anthrax attack was the result of any
"right
> > wing
> > > conspiracy".
> >
> > Hmmmmm. I read several of your answers to posters in which
you
> > said just the opposite. Shall I retrieve them for you Ed?
> >
>
> Don't bother. You won't find I said anything like that, but
you'll
> find something you can inaccurately interpret that way - just
as you
> interpret everything else.
Ed, please, I will repost exactly what you said, in your context
with no snipping. You agreed with several posters that
right-wingers sent the anthrax. Stop denying it.
>
> > Ed, "reports" "self-serving opinions" and conjecture is not
> > "evidence." You do not have a single shred of evidence, not
a
> > shred, not a connecting thread, nothing whatsoever that
indicates
> > in any manner that a "mad scientist" is behind the sending of
the
> > anthrax.
>
> > If this is a wild theory, then how come it's the theory
believed by
> > the FBI and the Federation of American Scientists? The
scientist
> > probably didn't write the letters. Check my web site for
> > information on who probably did:
Ed, your theory is not believed by the FBI or the Federation of
American Scientists. They also do not have a shred of evidence
that lends any weight to that "mad scientist" theory. Also if
you want hits on your web site, then try something else. Your
web site does not provide a single smidgen of evidence to support
your "mad scientist" theories, nor your "right wingers" theory.
If you claim otherwise, let's hear it here. If you cannot post
at least "ONE" real thread of evidence to support your theory,
don't you think you should start thinking up another theory?
Perhaps one that makes some sense?
>
> > >
> > > The anthrax letters clearly indicate that the terrorists
did
> > not want
> > > anyone to die as a result of their attack. The first
letters
> > told
> > > the recipients to take penicillin. The second letters told
the
> > > recipients that the powder was anthrax. Does that sound
like
> > an Al
> > > Qaeda attack to you?
> >
> > Yes Ed, it sounds exactly like terrorism. The purpose of
> > terrorism is to instill terror not necessarily to kill.
> > Moreover, clearly the writer was probably being facetious.
>
> Hmmm. So, you're saying that the Al Qaeda had enough anthrax
to kill
> millions of Americans, but instead they decided to use it all
in a
> few letters to a couple Democratic Senators because the
terrorists
> wanted to be facetious?
Ed, instead of trying to put words in my mouth, and then
ridiculing your own distortions, read what I said. Sending out
anthrax via the mails is clearly an act of terrorism. You said
it was not, I say it is. No where did I say the terrorists had
enough anthrax to kill millions of people, those are your words
not mine. However, I certainly doubt if they used all of their
anthrax stockpile in those few letters. Moreover, they may try
several means of delivery before this is over.
>
> And you're saying that even though we're bombing the shit out
of the
> Al Qaeda in Afganistan, they still like their little joke and
haven't
> used any more of their anthrax? And you think I side with the
Al
> Qaeda because I think they are murdering bastards who would
never
> pass up an opportunity to kill thousands of Americans?
Ed, when and where we will be attacked again is anyone's guess.
But yes, I think we at least set them back a few months.
Moreover, why are you claiming they are joking? Sending out
anthrax via the mails certainly is not a "joke" Ed, and I am sure
they did not mean it to be a "joke." They meant it to frighten
all Americans, and they accomplished exactly that. However, the
question now is whether the backlash from their own supporters
from using biological weapons will stop them from trying to use
it again.....I think before they are done they will most
certainly use it again when, where and how is anyone's guess.
Nonsense Ed! The anthrax was in two different forms. Two
different stockpiles were used. Why would your mad scientist use
that hiatus period to make sure his anthrax would just fall
through the pores of the envelope faster than the first batch!
HAHAHAHAHA. Please Ed, you are starting to make me laugh.
According to you, your "mad scientist" decided he wanted to
refine his anthrax better so that it would work less efficiently
than his first batch.....weeeeoooooo Ed. Where do you get this
nonsense?
> The idea that there were two stockpiles is nuts. No one
believes
> that.
Everyone believes that Ed...that is except you.. The anthrax
composition of the second mailing was completely different from
the first mailing Ed. Obviously the sender had access to two
completely different sources for his anthrax. He certainly would
not have refined his anthrax into a finer powder so it would fall
though the pores of the envelope. Ed, he taped the corners to
insure the anthrax would not fall out, so why on earth would he
refine it to make it fall out better than his first batch? The
anthrax sender clearly had access to two completely different
stockpiles of anthrax. He also was so stupid he did not realize
the anthrax would leak through the pores of the envelopes he
purchased from the post office. Obviously this moron is not a
"mad scientist" Ed.
No Ed, to refine the anthrax to the level the second batch was
refined you need a laboratory. A BIG laboratory with lots of
equipment. Moreover, you avoided answering the question in
respect to where in Middle or Northern New Jersey would your "mad
scientist" work with anthrax? The FBI says they believe the
perpetrator lives and works in that area....yet none of the labs
in that area have ever produced anthrax......so much for your
"mad scientist" theory Ed.
Doug Grant (Tm)
> Ed
>
>
Kris Baker
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN wrote in message ...
>They would not have had so many meetings discussing how
>to use a weapon they did not possess.
Al Qaeda possessed four US airliners before September 11th?
Kris
Ed Lake
>
> Ed, please. The CIA does not discuss plans to use weapons they
> *know* they do not possess! That is crazy Ed. Obviously the Al
> Qaeda had several high level strategy meetings discussing how
> they were going to use their anthrax. They would not have had so
> many meetings discussing how to use a weapon they did not
> possess.
>
Doug,
This is total crap. As Kris Baker points out in another response,
they did not possess any US airliners, yet they developed plans for
them. And they did not possess any of the parts to make an atomic
bomb, but they developed plans for building one. They did not have
any crop duster aircraft, nor any deadly chemicals to put into the
crop dusters, but they developed plans for them.
Agencies the the CIA and terrorist groups like Al Qaeda knock around
ideas all the time. For every 100 ideas, maybe 10 get developed.
For every 10 that get developed, maybe 1 gets implemented.
> > > If this is a wild theory, then how come it's the theory
> believed by
> > > the FBI and the Federation of American Scientists? The
> scientist
> > > probably didn't write the letters. Check my web site for
> > > information on who probably did:
>
> Ed, your theory is not believed by the FBI or the Federation of
> American Scientists.
Have you looked at the web site of the Federation of American
Scientists? Barbara Rosenberg says almost the same thing that I
say. Except she believes that the American scientist works in the
Washington D.C. area. The FAS site is here:
http://www.fas.org/bwc/news/anthraxreport.htm
Let's see if I got this straight. I'm saying that Al Qaeda is a
terrorist group that would NEVER waste a weapon that could kill
millions of people on just two Democrat Senators. I'm saying they
would kill as many Americans as they could. You are saying they are
a bunch of scamps who like to be facetious and were just horsing
around when they sent the letters to the Senators. ("Facetious" is
your word. Are you sure you know what it means?)
The fact that the anthrax sent to Daschle and Leahy could have killed
millions of people is not in doubt. The lethality of the anthrax has
been reported countless times - and as recently as yesterday:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/attack/2002/01/23/usat-anthrax.htm
although that particular report does not say how many people could
have been killed by the anthrax. Early estimate were that it could
have killed hundreds of thousands, but later estimates upped that
number considerably.
> >
> > And you're saying that even though we're bombing the shit out
> of the
> > Al Qaeda in Afganistan, they still like their little joke and
> haven't
> > used any more of their anthrax? And you think I side with the
> Al
> > Qaeda because I think they are murdering bastards who would
> never
> > pass up an opportunity to kill thousands of Americans?
>
> Ed, when and where we will be attacked again is anyone's guess.
> But yes, I think we at least set them back a few months.
How? We're bombing Afganistan, not New Jersey. How does what we are
doing in Afganistan prevent some Al Qaeda terrorist in New Jersey
from doing another anthrax mailing? Or from using the anthrax in a
different way?
If they had anthrax, don't you you think they would be using it in
revenge for what's happening to the Al Qaeda in Afganistan?
>
> Moreover, why are you claiming they are joking? Sending out
> anthrax via the mails certainly is not a "joke" Ed, and I am sure
> they did not mean it to be a "joke."
"Facetious" was your word. You said they were being facetious when
they wrote and sent the anthrax letters. Facetious means "lightly
joking, particularly at an inappropriate time".
> > There was only one "stockpile" of anthrax. The scientist spent
> the
> > three weeks between Sept. 18 and Oct. 9 refining the anthrax to
> make
> > the spores smaller and more deadly.
> >
> Nonsense Ed! The anthrax was in two different forms. Two
> different stockpiles were used.
Check the FAS site. Check any site you want. There was only ONE
strain of anthrax involved, and the ONLY difference between the
anthrax in the letter of Sept. 18 and the letters of Oct. 9 was that
the second batch was MORE REFINED.
> Why would your mad scientist use
> that hiatus period to make sure his anthrax would just fall
> through the pores of the envelope faster than the first batch!
> HAHAHAHAHA. Please Ed, you are starting to make me laugh.
> According to you, your "mad scientist" decided he wanted to
> refine his anthrax better so that it would work less efficiently
> than his first batch.....weeeeoooooo Ed. Where do you get this
> nonsense?
The scientist refined his anthrax to make it more deadly. But he
clearly didn't want to kill anyone, since he told people that it was
anthrax. He just wanted to demonstrate how a real terrorist could
deliver anthrax to a target. His purpose was "terror", but he was
trying to "terrorize" Daschle and Leahy into taking action against
foreign terrorists.
>
>
> > The idea that there were two stockpiles is nuts. No one
> believes
> > that.
>
> Everyone believes that Ed...that is except you.. The anthrax
> composition of the second mailing was completely different from
> the first mailing Ed.
Absolutely untrue. The ONLY difference was that the anthrax in the
second mailing was more refined. Where do you get this nonsense?
> > And you don't need a lab to develop anthrax.
> You
> > just need the anthrax, the equipment (about $2,000 worth) and
> the
> > right knowledge.
> >
> No Ed, to refine the anthrax to the level the second batch was
> refined you need a laboratory. A BIG laboratory with lots of
> equipment.
Nonsense. Check my web site at http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
where you will find newspaper articles that quote experts. An expert
could do it in his garage with only $2,000 worth of equipment that is
readily available.
> Moreover, you avoided answering the question in
> respect to where in Middle or Northern New Jersey would your "mad
> scientist" work with anthrax? The FBI says they believe the
> perpetrator lives and works in that area....yet none of the labs
> in that area have ever produced anthrax......so much for your
> "mad scientist" theory Ed.
The scientist in the New Jersey area isn't the scientist who obtained
the anthrax from the government lab. That scientist is in
Wisconsin. The scientist in New Jersey (or New York) is an expert,
too, but not in bioweapons. He has the knowhow, the equipment, and
the motivation. And when he was given the anthrax, that was all that
he needed.
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
"Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigyy.net> wrote in message
news:0R248.12879$CP.177...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
could get them. That is the same as having them. Obviously, Al
Qaeda did not plan for years to use weapons they did not possess
or have access to. Any claim that *any* organization would plan
for years how to use a weapon they could never possess borders on
the irrational.
Al Qaeda's documents proved they held dozens of high level
meetings for the purpose of determining the best way to use
anthrax as a weapon against the United States.
It seems that Ed and you want us to believe they did all that
planning and held all of those meetings in respect to a weapon
they did not possess or have access to. That premise is, like I
said, irrational. Obviously Al Qaeda possessed or had access to
anthrax, or they would not have spent *years* discussing the
various ways to use it against America. Now couple that
knowledge with the fact that anthrax *was* used to attack
American officials and media, the resulting conclusion is
obvious: Al Qaeda terrorists are behind the anthrax attacks.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
"Ed Lake" <det...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:3C518AB5...@newsguy.com...
> "DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN" wrote:
>
> >
> > Ed, please. The CIA does not discuss plans to use weapons
they
> > *know* they do not possess! That is crazy Ed. Obviously the
Al
> > Qaeda had several high level strategy meetings discussing how
> > they were going to use their anthrax. They would not have
had so
> > many meetings discussing how to use a weapon they did not
> > possess.
> >
>
> Doug,
>
> This is total crap. As Kris Baker points out in another
response,
> they did not possess any US airliners, yet they developed plans
for
> them. And they did not possess any of the parts to make an
atomic
> bomb, but they developed plans for building one. They did not
have
> any crop duster aircraft, nor any deadly chemicals to put into
the
> crop dusters, but they developed plans for them.
Pleazzze Ed. The Al Qaeda terrorists knew they could gain access
to the commercial airliners, they spent years testing the
security to determine the best way to use those weapons. Your
claim they spent years of high-level meetings in respect to how
to deliver anthrax against America, while all the time not
possessing anthrax or knowing how to get it is nuts!
Moreover, they were inquiring about crop dusters because they
*had* something to put in them...anthrax. Your claim now that
they were inquiring to use crop dusters for something they could
not use with crop dusters is analogous to some of your other
weird claims....why would they do that Ed? Moreover, the
documents in Kabul show they spent years and dozens of high level
planning meetings discussing the various ways to use anthrax
against America....there is NO EVIDENCE they had a single meeting
on how to use nuclear weapons against America. Why? Because
they did not possess nuclear weapons. But they did possess
anthrax, and they spent a very long time and involved their top
people in planning how to deliver it. Now couple that
information with the fact that anthrax was used to attack America
within one week of the 9/11 terrorist attack, and the conclusion,
even for you Ed, should be obvious. The Al Qaeda terrorists are
behind the anthrax attacks.
>
> Agencies the the CIA and terrorist groups like Al Qaeda knock
around
> ideas all the time. For every 100 ideas, maybe 10 get
developed.
> For every 10 that get developed, maybe 1 gets implemented.
>
Ed, looking around for "ideas" does not include "ideas" involving
weapons that do not exist. The CIA is not sitting around holding
dozens of high level meetings discussing how to use
"anti-gravity" weapons Ed. Why? Because they do not possess
anti-gravity weapons. But is the CIA interested in all the ways
anthrax can be used against America? You bet. Why? Because
they know the Al Qaeda terrorists have anthrax. Moreover, Al
Qaeda did not and would not hold all of those high level meetings
clearly discussing how to deliver anthrax against America if it
did not possess or have access to anthrax.
> > > > If this is a wild theory, then how come it's the theory
> > believed by
> > > > the FBI and the Federation of American Scientists? The
> > scientist
> > > > probably didn't write the letters. Check my web site for
> > > > information on who probably did:
> >
> > Ed, your theory is not believed by the FBI or the Federation
of
> > American Scientists.
>
> Have you looked at the web site of the Federation of American
> Scientists? Barbara Rosenberg says almost the same thing that
I
> say. Except she believes that the American scientist works in
the
> Washington D.C. area. The FAS site is here:
Like I said Ed, you nor anyone has a single shred of evidence
that any "mad scientist" is behind the sending of the anthrax.
All of the real evidence points to the Al Qaeda terrorists.
I know some people that think that "Bigfoot" is behind the
anthrax attacks. There are even some that claim the Israelis
sent the anthrax, and even others believe the anthrax came from
the Martians. However, they, like you, do not have even a little
smidgen of evidence, not a thread, not a minuscule amount of real
evidence, in any form whatsoever, to prove their "pet" theories.
You rail on and on about your "mad scientist" or "right wingers"
theory, but all you can say when asked for any a shred of
evidence to support your theory is that "someone other than me
"thinks" I am right." Sorry Ed, you need to do a little better
than that.
Come on now Ed. Where did I say the terrorists were "scamps who
like to be facetious and were just horsing around?" I see you
are trying to distort what I said and then ridiculing your own
distortions again Ed. Now Ed, when you "make up a story" and
then falsely attribute your story to someone else, and then try
and ridicule your own story, do you know what that makes you look
like? Does the word "idiot" mean anything to you Ed?
Stay with the subject and stop making up stories....The
terrorists certainly did not waste their anthrax weapon. They
proved they could create nationwide terror by using it exactly
the way they used it. They could not have killed millions of
people with the amount of anthrax they used Ed....how would have
they disbursed it to "kill millions of people?" Your claims are
bordering the irrational Ed.
> The fact that the anthrax sent to Daschle and Leahy could have
killed
> millions of people is not in doubt. The lethality of the
anthrax has
> been reported countless times - and as recently as yesterday:
> > although that particular report does not say how many people
could
> have been killed by the anthrax. Early estimate were that it
could
> have killed hundreds of thousands, but later estimates upped
that
> number considerably.
Ed once again you are distorting the facts. POTENTIALLY *if*
hundreds of thousands of people would somehow be exposed to all
of the spores in one place it could have killed a few thousand,
if they never went to the doctor and anthrax was never diagnosed.
But how could have the anthrax been delivered in such a manner as
to kill all of those people? Answer, that small amount could not
have been disbursed in such a manner as to kill a hundred people
not to mention thousands. Moreover, if the terrorists used
airplanes or balloons to deliver the anthrax, who knows where it
would have ended up? In the sea perhaps. By using the mails
they were able to strike terror in the hearts of every American
that receives mail....that is exactly what they wanted to do Ed.
The Terrorists used the anthrax through the mails to create
terror. Your claim they failed is hilarious. People are still
to this day wearing gloves and masks when they open their mail.
That tactic is clearly terrorist, and would not represent
anything other than terrorism.
>
>
> > >
> > > And you're saying that even though we're bombing the shit
out
> > of the
> > > Al Qaeda in Afganistan, they still like their little joke
and
> > haven't
> > > used any more of their anthrax? And you think I side with
the
> > Al
> > > Qaeda because I think they are murdering bastards who would
> > never
> > > pass up an opportunity to kill thousands of Americans?
> >
> > Ed, when and where we will be attacked again is anyone's
guess.
> > But yes, I think we at least set them back a few months.
>
> How? We're bombing Afganistan, not New Jersey. How does what
we are
> doing in Afganistan prevent some Al Qaeda terrorist in New
Jersey
> from doing another anthrax mailing? Or from using the anthrax
in a
> different way?
Ed, you seem to not understand how an organization like Al Qaeda
works. It needs to provide instructions to its operatives, it
needs to communicate, to provide resources, direction, planning
and most of all, money and weapons. If you do not understand
these basic facts Ed, then I am beginning to suspect why you do
not understand the obvious fact the terrorists are behind the
anthrax attacks. Al Qaeda's headquarters was located in
Afghanistan. We bombed their headquarters, and we found volumes
of documents connecting them to the delivery of anthrax as a
weapon.
> If they had anthrax, don't you you think they would be using it
in
> revenge for what's happening to the Al Qaeda in Afganistan?
>
Al Qaeda first needs to reorganize, then it will carefully plan
the next attack. Then it will execute the next attack, that is
if we do not destroy its capabilities to attack first. If it has
anthrax or any other chemical or biological weapon it will use it
against America if it can.
> >
> > Moreover, why are you claiming they are joking? Sending out
> > anthrax via the mails certainly is not a "joke" Ed, and I am
sure
> > they did not mean it to be a "joke."
>
> "Facetious" was your word. You said they were being facetious
when
> they wrote and sent the anthrax letters. Facetious means
"lightly
> joking, particularly at an inappropriate time".
Once again Ed, you seem to be distorting what I said for your own
self-serving reasons. I said what they wrote was clearly
facetious. Sending the anthrax clearly was not meant to be a
joke or facetious. The act of "sending" is different from
writing "You die now take Penicillin." (Or words to that
effect.) That statement sounds either sarcastic or facetious to
me. Why would someone say that unless it was an "inappropriate
joke" or full of bitter sarcasm? So get it clear in your mind
Ed, writing is not "sending" -
> > > There was only one "stockpile" of anthrax. The scientist
spent
> > the
> > > three weeks between Sept. 18 and Oct. 9 refining the
anthrax to
> > make
> > > the spores smaller and more deadly.
> > >
> > Nonsense Ed! The anthrax was in two different forms. Two
> > different stockpiles were used.
>
> Check the FAS site. Check any site you want. There was only
ONE
> strain of anthrax involved, and the ONLY difference between the
> anthrax in the letter of Sept. 18 and the letters of Oct. 9 was
that
> the second batch was MORE REFINED.
So, are you agreeing with what I said or what Ed? I said the
anthrax was in two different forms, you agreed and said their was
only one difference between the two. So you are admitting there
was a form difference between the two and clearly confirming what
I said was true. Obviously, there were two stockpiles of
anthrax. One refined more than the other. The terrorists had
access to two different stockpiles of anthrax.
> > Why would your mad scientist use
> > that hiatus period to make sure his anthrax would just fall
> > through the pores of the envelope faster than the first
batch!
> > HAHAHAHAHA. Please Ed, you are starting to make me laugh.
> > According to you, your "mad scientist" decided he wanted to
> > refine his anthrax better so that it would work less
efficiently
> > than his first batch.....weeeeoooooo Ed. Where do you get
this
> > nonsense?
>
> The scientist refined his anthrax to make it more deadly. But
he
> clearly didn't want to kill anyone, since he told people that
it was
> anthrax. He just wanted to demonstrate how a real terrorist
could
> deliver anthrax to a target. His purpose was "terror", but he
was
> trying to "terrorize" Daschle and Leahy into taking action
against
> foreign terrorists.
Ed, he sent the anthrax for the purpose of killing people. The
terrorists knew it would probably kill the recipients yet some
would survive to tell the tale to the press. They taped up the
corners of the envelopes so the anthrax would not leak out before
it reached its addressees. However, they were so stupid they did
not know that (1) American Senators and media cleb's do not open
their own mail, and (2) the envelopes they bought would not hold
their anthrax even with the corners taped shut! These people are
hardly "mad scientists" like you claim Ed.
Your new "theory" that your "mad scientist" sent anthrax but
never meant it to do any harm is way beyond belief Ed.....You
seem to be getting in deeper and deeper as you go along.
>
> >
> >
> > > The idea that there were two stockpiles is nuts. No one
> > believes
> > > that.
> >
> > Everyone believes that Ed...that is except you.. The anthrax
> > composition of the second mailing was completely different
from
> > the first mailing Ed.
>
> Absolutely untrue. The ONLY difference was that the anthrax in
the
> second mailing was more refined. Where do you get this
nonsense?
Ed, it is hardly nonsense if you just admitted what I said was
true. There were two different forms of anthrax. You agree,
then call it "nonsense?" Medication Ed, you must be forgetting
your meds Ed.
>
> > > And you don't need a lab to develop anthrax.
> > You
> > > just need the anthrax, the equipment (about $2,000 worth)
and
> > the
> > > right knowledge.
> > >
> > No Ed, to refine the anthrax to the level the second batch
was
> > refined you need a laboratory. A BIG laboratory with lots of
> > equipment.
>
> Nonsense. Check my web site at
> where you will find newspaper articles that quote experts. An
expert
> could do it in his garage with only $2,000 worth of equipment
that is
> readily available.
No Ed, please read what I said above. To "refine" the anthrax
into a weapon's grade, like was found in the second mailing, you
need a lot more than just $2000 worth of equipment "that is
readily available." Moreover, Ed, Garages are not air tight, not
to mention do not contain sterile conditions, not to mention a
dozen of other problems with mixing up a batch of weapons grade
anthrax in your "garage" Ed......I am starting to wonder about
you Ed.
>
> > Moreover, you avoided answering the question in
> > respect to where in Middle or Northern New Jersey would your
"mad
> > scientist" work with anthrax? The FBI says they believe the
> > perpetrator lives and works in that area....yet none of the
labs
> > in that area have ever produced anthrax......so much for your
> > "mad scientist" theory Ed.
>
> The scientist in the New Jersey area isn't the scientist who
obtained
> the anthrax from the government lab. That scientist is in
> Wisconsin. The scientist in New Jersey (or New York) is an
expert,
> too, but not in bioweapons. He has the knowhow, the equipment,
and
> the motivation. And when he was given the anthrax, that was
all that
> he needed.
Arrrgghhh! Yet "another" theory! Now you have not one but "TWO"
mad-scientists working together! Since I asked you to give me
the location or the laboratory that produces anthrax in Middle or
Northern New Jersey (where the FBI said the sender of the anthrax
lived and worked) and since none of these laboratories or
military installations that produce or produced anthrax exist in
that area, that fact proved your "mad scientist" theory
completely wrong.
However, NOW, (for the first time) you come up with "TWO" mad
scientists attacking America with anthrax; , one making the stuff
and then sending to New Jersey and the other sending it out.
Weeeeoooooooo. I am beginning to wonder what is next Ed?
Little green mad scientists that dance around under your bed at
night?
Ed, all of the evidence at this time points to the Al Qaeda or
Iraqi terrorists behind the anthrax attacks. There is not a
single shred of evidence that points to "mad scientists" or
"right-wingers." like you hysterically are claiming.
Frankly, I hope you are right and I am wrong. If it were just
some mad scientist that had a small amount of anthrax and wanted
to shake up the government to spend some more money in his
field - then we would have little to worry about in the future in
regards to another attack. Yet unfortunately for us all, the
evidence all points to the Terrorists possessing and willing to
use biological weapons against us....and that scenario should be
the one we should be worried about and do something about before
it happens.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
> Ed
>
Nightlite
news:u53spig...@corp.supernews.com...
If the Al Qaeda guys made their best bio attack with the anthrax, I am
pretty surprised that so few people were affected.
The letters were not sent in such a way to permit large amounts of it to be
in a target rich environment.
Therefore they were clearly targeting the addressee as opposed to say a
crowd.
This doesn't have Al Qaeda style of attack random death to large groups of
people ships airplanes and buildings using explosives.
I do understand it is not practical for them to put explosives in Dashles
office as opposed to Anthrax, but would they stupid enough to think he opens
his own mail ?
I admit they cause terror in more ways than explosives and shooting people
as there has been executions from kidnappings attributed to groups
associated with Al Qaeda.
I cannot see why the letters were sent to those people, how would be of any
benefit to Al Qaeda ?
Explain why they were targeted and so sloppily, what was the desired result
?
The biggest outcome for policy adjustment it did was make the USA more aware
of Bio terrorism and to upgrade all the local, state and government workers
to be better able to deal with it.
And to fuel the war against terror
I don't intend to disrespect those that did get killed but the whole thing
is pretty fishy in terms of the motivation assuming the person who sent it
wasn't a total fool.
That's not to say someone with the knowledge or access was overly
intelligent but if they were they should have foreseen all that has now
happened in that we will work harder to eradicate and imprison them for
their crimes.
If that was Al Qaedas plan for the anthrax it was a pretty lame bio attack
given that the quantities they sent were enough to kill thousands in the
right situation.
Do you think given their style they would go for the kill with 10 people
causing two politicians and a couple of TV anchors and Journalists to die)
or thousands (which could include a few famous people)
Conversely if it was somehow sent from someone opposed to Al Qaeda it would
still get the same response and no-one they liked would get hurt.
The politicians with the weakest hold on government as it stood to do
anything about Al Qaeda.
If the sender had a clue they would also realize that it would introduce
more anti terrorism solidarity after the wtc attack from the dems and
repubs.
Why would they want that ?
The legal changes ?
The further increase in military spending and anti terrorism funding ?
It also doesn't make sense that the Anthrax killer used a seemingly
'non-traditional' martyrdom method (unless of course those involved in the
anthrax are already dead)
The wtc attack was similar to many other Al Qaeda planned executed and
failed events.
They seem to like exploding themselves but to make two such audacious
attacks with different complex methods but not simultaneously ?
If they could get all three planes, surely they could mail the letters to
time the attack with the wtc hijack ?
One was way successful, It doesn't add up how poorly planned and executed
the anthrax attack was in comparison to the wtc attack.
The whole style of the Anthrax letters seemed very amateurish in its
targeting.
These guys are sworn terrorists who are meant to want to 'kill all the
American's
Why didn't they use the anthrax to kill more people ?
When I weigh in the odds of them being stupid enough to screw up all of
these things in one attack :
method of delivery which doesn't seem to suit their style of mass victims,
The lack of the usual Al Qaeda Martyr being identified
The additional anti terrorism feeling it maintained and increased by coming
after the wtc attack
And the lack of synchronicity with the wtc attack which should have been
possible,
I end up still having doubts about Al Qaeda being behind this.
DOUGLAS G.V. REIMAN
"Nightlite" <im_no...@ational.org> wrote in message
news:q3r48.232837$Zi2.9...@atlpnn01.usenetserver.com...
The amount of anthrax they used could not be disbursed in any way
as to really harm many people. Moreover, making every household
in America afraid to open their own mail is a terrorist
wet-dream. Not to mention the possibilty of destroying our mail
service. Radomly killing people also was already accomplished
by the 9/11 attacks. Terrrorist use typically Five prong
attacks, and none of the five duplicate. The anthrax tactic was
almost text-book terrorist.
> I admit they cause terror in more ways than explosives and
shooting people
> as there has been executions from kidnappings attributed to
groups
> associated with Al Qaeda.
> I cannot see why the letters were sent to those people, how
would be of any
> benefit to Al Qaeda ?
If you remember the initial Al Qaeda cover story that "American
Right Wingers" did the 9/11 attacks - sending anthrax exclusively
to Democrats would provide exactly the cover they needed. It was
not until the FBI positively identified the 9/11 attackers that
Al Qaeda started blaming everything on the Israelis. The major
mistake Al Qaeda made, however, was sending an anthrax envelope
to the tabloid media company that had recently ran very
denigrating stories about Osama Bin Fruitcake. In fact, there
was so much anthrax in that Florida building more than one
letter must have been used.
The right situation would be impossible to create for any other
disbursement of anthrax. Al Qaeda knew all that after
investigating the crop dusting aircraft and dismissing them as a
possible delivery vehicle. Moreover, attacking our mails and
instilling terror in every American household is classic
terrorism.
See above for the answers to all of your questions. All of the
evidence points to the Al Qaeda terrorists. Wondering why they
did something or did not do something is not evidence, it is
speculation. We all can speculate as much as we want...but the
evidence points to Al Qaeda.
Doug Grant (Tm)
>
>
>
debby
>
> Ed, if he just had a case of the "sniffles" as you put it, why
> would he pressure a pharmacists for specific antibiotics?
> Moreover, why would he not simply go to a doctor and get his cure
> for the sniffles, as the doctor clearly would not have any reason
> to turn the "sniffles" over to the authorities. But once again,
> you are missing the point. In fact Mohammad Atta did not have
> the "sniffles." His partner was the one suffering from the
> inhalation anthrax. Atta had a severe skin infection all over
> his hands....but strange as it sounds BOTH Atta and his lung
> infected friend asked for the same antibiotic? Both of these
> terrorists showed signs of having skin anthrax and inhalation
> anthrax, and both asked for the same antibiotic, and both were
> afraid to go to a doctor for a prescription. This evidence can
> hardly be dismissed as nothing more than the "sniffles" Ed.
>
How did you find this out. I have never heard any reference to an Atta
infection anywhere??? Debby S.<sarg...@infi.net>