Home (Post) Mobile Authors Say Anything Register Login

Thursday, August 07, 2008

Even WSJ Runs Pro Ivins Op-Ed

See here.

The spores could not have been produced at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, where Ivins worked, without many other people being aware of it. Furthermore, the equipment to make such a product does not exist at the institute.

The product contained essentially pure spores. The particle size was 1.5 to 3 microns in diameter. There are several methods used to produce anthrax that small. But most of them require milling the spores to a size small enough that it can be inhaled into the lower reaches of the lungs. In this case, however, the anthrax spores were not milled.

According to a FBI news release from November 2001, the particles were coated by a “product not seen previously to be used in this fashion before.” Apparently, the spores were coated with a polyglass which tightly bound hydrophilic silica to each particle. That’s what was briefed (according to one of my former weapons inspectors at the United Nations Special Commission) by the FBI to the German Foreign Ministry at the time.

Another FBI leak indicated that each particle was given a weak electric charge, thereby causing the particles to repel each other at the molecular level. This made it easier for the spores to float in the air, and increased their retention in the lungs.

In short, the potential lethality of anthrax in this case far exceeds that of any powdered product found in the now extinct U.S. Biological Warfare Program. In meetings held on the cleanup of the anthrax spores in Washington, the product was described by an official at the Department of Homeland Security as “according to the Russian recipes”—apparently referring to the use of the weak electric charge.

The FBI has not officially released information on why it focused on Ivins, and whether he was about to be charged or arrested. And when the FBI does release this information, we should all remember that the case needs to be firmly based on solid information that would conclusively prove that a lone scientist could make such a sophisticated product.

From what we know so far, Bruce Ivins, although potentially a brilliant scientist, was not that man. The multiple disciplines and technologies required to make the anthrax in this case do not exist at Army’s Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Inhalation studies are conducted at the institute, but they are done using liquid preparations, not powdered products.

The FBI spent between 12 and 18 months trying “to reverse engineer” (make a replica of) the anthrax in the letters sent to Messrs. Daschle and Leahy without success, according to FBI news releases. So why should federal investigators or the news media or the American public believe that a lone scientist would be able to do so?

Comments

They’re wrong; what’s your point?


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on August 7, 2008 at 05:44 pm

How do you know?

The ‘official’ classic ‘lone gunman’ story has been beaten to shreds.
2wolhza.jpg


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on August 7, 2008 at 05:51 pm

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/08/the_case_against_dr_ivins.html

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-anthrax2-2008aug02,0,3650657.story

There are plenty more.

How do you not know?

BTW, nice picture of your mother.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on August 7, 2008 at 06:09 pm

r108
This author was a weapons inspector in Iraq in the late 90s. He believes that Iraq and Syria might have been involved in the anthrax attack. In fact, you have probably quoted this guy often in your ranting about Iraq’s WMDs. Now he’s full of shit.

Okay, just keep in mind that you are deriding one of your own sources.


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on August 7, 2008 at 10:43 pm

Okay, just keep in mind that you are deriding one of your own sources.

I’ll ‘splain this just one more time to you, moron; I don’t have “sources” in the way you lefties feel about it. I evaluate every statement on its own merits.  If you ever said anything accurate or intelligent, I would consider you a “source” on that particular bit of info.
Nobody’s perfect, and you are at the bottom of that particular scale, but even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.

What you morons who believe in “sources” don’t realize is that you could just as easily discriminate between the true and false information, since you do it already when you pick your “sources”.  The “source” you choose to believe determines your ability to know the truth.  You’re already discriminating, but at the wrong level.
Dumb, dumb, dumb!


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on August 7, 2008 at 10:50 pm

I evaluate every statement on its own merits.

Your evaluation of a statement INTERNAL to that statement?

Wow. A moment of honesty.

What ‘merit’? Whether or not it conforms to your pre-existent prejudices?


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on August 7, 2008 at 11:02 pm

Also, if the guy’s not credible… then the guys not credible.


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on August 7, 2008 at 11:03 pm

Also, if the guy’s not credible… then the guys not credible.

Once again, the weak intellect seeks a comfortable generalization, rather than exerting the mental resources to ferret out the truth on each subject.
Pathetic.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on August 7, 2008 at 11:57 pm

What ‘merit’? Whether or not it conforms to your pre-existent prejudices?

That would be you, who blindly accepts anything from your “sources”.  Your prejudice is revealed in your choice of sources, moron.
Don’t be intellectually lazy; do the work yourself, rather than simply being a parrot for the beliefs of others.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on August 7, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses. Confirm your email address here.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.