The Anthrax Mystery: Solved ???

Oliver said:
Yes - the FBI keeps their mouths shut - even to congress. Nothing new at all.
Click to expand...

You DID read why they said they wouldn't brief Congress again, right? As an American, I support that. As a German, what's it to you?


On the other hand, the current White House would love to publish
anything that would link Anthrax to Al Qaeda.
No surprise here.
Click to expand...

You're sure of that are you? Well, guess what. They haven't published anything linking anthrax to Al Queda. Just guessing here, but Al Queda probably had nothing to do with that terrorist attack.

Your hatred for this Country slants everything you write. I used to look at you as a critical thinker but now I realize you're just as ignorant and prejudiced as the lcf nuts.
 
Gravy said:
Strange, because it wasn't weapons-grade anthrax. Where did you hear this, and when? It certainly hasn't been news around here.
:confused:
Click to expand...


Huh? It was weapons-grade anthrax, from the Ames strain. One of the telltale signs of weapons-grade anthrax is a victim's unresponsiveness to penicillin, which did occur (plus, it was mentioned by numerous experts through various media outlets).

If you're interested in learning more, just type "anthrax us lab" into Google and click "I feel lucky".
 
Calcas said:
Your hatred for this Country slants everything you write. I used to look at you as a critical thinker but now I realize you're just as ignorant and prejudiced as the lcf nuts.
Click to expand...


That's interesting, because I haven't seen anything that would indicate that he hates this Country.

Even more interesting is the fact that you've changed your mind about Oliver being a critical thinker, based solely on the fact that he no longer agrees with you regarding 9/11. So back when he did agree with you, was he really a critical thinker at that point?

What about someone who has no opinion about 9/11 (or US Politics in-general) - how would you determine whether or not that person is a critical thinker? Assuming the person initially passed your test, but later decided that 9/11 was an inside job (after doing all the necessary research), would you still acknowledge that person as a critical thinker?
 
deep44 said:
Even more interesting is the fact that you've changed your mind about Oliver being a critical thinker, based solely on the fact that he no longer agrees with you regarding 9/11.
Click to expand...

No, what's interesting is that you made a completely baseless and inaccurate statement. Where did I say 9-11 had ANYTHING to do with my opinion of Oliver changing? Where did I even infer that? Oh, that's right...I didn't.

Your giant leap to a wrong conclusion doesn't say much for your critical thinking skills either.

My opinion(s) of Oliver are based on the last 18 months of reading his posts. Most of them are NOT 9-11 related. But, his anti-Ameican slant on most everything else is apparant to me and, in fact, has been commented on by many other posters as well.
 
RedIbis said:
Wrong again:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2265-anthrax-attack-bug-identical-to-army-strain.html
Click to expand...


That article doesn't mention the oddities with the letters/envelopes themselves:
  • American date format (MM-DD-YY), as opposed to what is used elsewhere (DD-MM-YY).
  • explicit warnings that the envelopes contained anthrax, with one letter even mentioning the cure (penicillin). Those warnings would be considered severely counterproductive by any legitimate terrorist organization who was interested in maximizing casualties.
  • cleverly disguised envelopes (made to look like they were sent by some 4th grade student), ensuring that the letters would at least be opened. So it's not like they were short on ideas - they intentionally moved away from this "cover" to alert the recipients that anthrax was present.
So nothing really points to a foreign terrorist organization..
 
Calcas said:
No, what's interesting is that you made a completely baseless and inaccurate statement. Where did I say 9-11 had ANYTHING to do with my opinion of Oliver changing? Where did I even infer that? Oh, that's right...I didn't.

Your giant leap to a wrong conclusion doesn't say much for your critical thinking skills either.
Click to expand...


You're right, you didn't say that 9/11 had anything to do with your opinion of Oliver changing; however, you did infer it by comparing him to the "lcf nuts". If that's not what you intended to do, I would suggest being more specific in the future.

Additionally, your snap assessment of my critical thinking ability makes me wonder if you know what "critical thinking" even means, and I say that with utmost honesty. It is literally impossible to evaluate a person's critical thinking ability by reading a handful of their posts in an Internet forum, because there are simply too many uncertainties inherent to the medium (among other things).

If you're interested in continuing this discussion about critical thinking, we can start a new thread or just use PMs since it's slightly offtopic for both this thread & this sub-forum.
 
The only evidence that exists is that the Anthrax was the Ames strain. Several countries including the USA are in possession of it. It could have been a Mossad attack, a rogue Russian scientist, a disgruntled Serbian nationalist, angry white supremacists, a loony Nation of Islam freak, a Pakistani-American,....

but I think it was....

san03a2.jpg
 
The truly frustrating thing about trying to discuss the anthrax attacks is trying to find credible information about the stuff itself (sorry, kids, the paranoid conspiracy theory industry is not a credible source).

The Wiki article on the attacks contains a lot of citations which indicate that even expert opinion has been all over the place- it had additives, it didn't have additives, it was coated with silica, it wasn't coated with silica, it was better quality than the product of US and Soviet bioweapons programs, it could have been made by a single individual with relatively cheap equipment, and on and on. It seems definite that there were two different preparations used, but I can't even find out for sure whether one or both were penicillin-resistant of penicillin-susceptible.

I'm genuinely curious about that penicillin-susceptibility question because a susceptible strain seems inconsistent with the output of a national weapons program. If you're developing a biological WMD, leaving it treatable with the oldest antibiotic known to man just doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since "breeding" for resistance is possible.

The whole thing is just an enormous blank screen, perfect for everyone and his dog to project their personal hate object upon.

As for continuing to argue about whodunit-
Edited by prewitt81: 
Comment Removed

3784762ffaea4e88.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedIbis said:
Are you honestly suggesting that Gravy doesn't make mistakes? He's admitted as much. Oddly, even after admitting it, he still refers to people who also make mistakes as liars. Strange.
Click to expand...

Gravy is like the pope Infallible on matters of faith and morals.
 
RedIbis said:
Are you honestly suggesting that Gravy doesn't make mistakes? He's admitted as much. Oddly, even after admitting it, he still refers to people who also make mistakes as liars. Strange.
Click to expand...


I think he refers to people as liars when they know that what they are saying is false.
 
ktesibios said:
The truly frustrating thing about trying to discuss the anthrax attacks is trying to find credible information about the stuff itself (sorry, kids, the paranoid conspiracy theory industry is not a credible source).
Click to expand...


So what would you consider a credible source to be? Someone from the industry that is under suspicion for the attacks?

At some point you have to break this down logically, considering the following key points:
  • most signs indicate that the anthrax came from inside the US, even down to the water that was used (which came from the northeastern US).
  • given the limited number of people who would have enough access to anthrax to send it without anybody else noticing + the routine secrecy of the FBI's ongoing investigation (1), it's impossible to say whether the person (or persons) responsible for sending the anthrax have spoken to the media. That said, the lack of consensus from US scientists on a matter that really should be black & white isn't really all that shocking.
One should be able to acknowledge those simple facts without being labeled a conspiracy theorist who thinks "everybody is in on it". The reasoning is sound.

(1) it's possible and quite likely that the FBI has already eliminated a number of potential suspects; however, as civilians, we have no way of knowing who has been eliminated and who hasn't.
 
Par said:
I think he refers to people as liars when they know that what they are saying is false.
Click to expand...


Right, but there are two problems with that:

First, he refers to them as liars when he thinks what they are saying is false.

Second, he makes no distinction as to whether or not there was malicious intent. For example, if a friend of mine tells me, "wow, I haven't seen you in at least two years", he's not "lying" if we saw each other 23 months ago - he was rounding up, made a mistake, etc.

Gravy assumes (in almost every situation I've witnessed) that a person who ultimately disagrees with him about 9/11 is maliciously lying about any point of contention.

The example that sticks out most in my mind is Scott Forbes - instead of acknowledging that Scott could have been (and almost certainly was) recalling his perception of the partial WTC power down, Gravy concluded that Scott was maliciously lying for the sole purpose of gaining attention.

Of course, there's absolutely no evidence to suggest anything of the sort, as Scott gained no positive attention before he stopped commenting on the matter publicly due to threats against him, and possibly his family and/or coworkers (or something of the sort).
 
Last edited:
I wonder if there are any connections to anthrax attacks and sibel edmonds's claim that turks/israelis have been planting moles inside nuclear and bioweapon labs across the US.
 
RedIbis may be doing a "dan rather" ...

RedIbis said:
Wrong again:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2265-anthrax-attack-bug-identical-to-army-strain.html
Click to expand...
So Gravy said it was not weapons grade. You say it is based on this piece of work by who? BTW, not one mention of "weapons grade" anthrax in the article. Did I miss something, or did you cut the reference to "weapons grade" in the article. I will look again. OOPS not a grade, not a weapon, only one military!

Okay, where are you hiding the facts? Are you doing a "dan rather" on Gravy? Have a great weekend




MaGZ, Was that all the letters or just one? Were the other letters the same grade, the same kind. I was wondering how anyone knows anything about this since the investigation is still running. Is this hearsay stuff? Or you got facts on the post below? I would ask you for source on the below post, but it would be a neoNAZI source for sure.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom