• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

what ever happened on those anthrax incidents?

D

daniel49

Diamond Member
Was just thinking the other day about all the anthrax scares that were going on a few years ago.
Where some federal buildings were contaminated and I think there were some injuries/and or deaths.

Did anyone ever get charged in that or did it just remain unsolved?
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Now that you brought it up watch something come up again before or around Election time. Have to scare the sheeple.
Click to expand...

Outrageous accusations are ok dave but at least try and provide some useful imput😉
 
The spores were weaponized anthrax from a secret Army lab and they were released on the public and several Democratic congressmen. Only a limited number of people could have done it. Like who killed Kennedy there is something going on here somebody in the government doesn't want you to know.

It's not really important though because there were only enough spores there to kill just millions.
 
considering how small the toll was (relatively speaking) the amount of anthrax that was released and who the perps targeted was meant to terrorize and control the masses rather than kill as many as possible. whoever gained the most from creating all this fear and paranoia probably instigated it.

the fact that the perps were never found, even with today's impressive forensic technology, and even after they traced the source points to...uh-oh, uhh never mind, i'm just another clueless conspiracy monger.😉
 
Originally posted by: tweaker2
considering how small the toll was (relatively speaking) the amount of anthrax that was released and who the perps targeted was meant to terrorize and control the masses rather than kill as many as possible. whoever gained the most from creating all this fear and paranoia probably instigated it.

the fact that the perps were never found, even with today's impressive forensic technology, and even after they traced the source points to...uh-oh, uhh never mind, i'm just another clueless conspiracy monger.😉
Click to expand...

But it sounds about right... Why else would they just so completely drop the investigation?
 
Why don?t you just come out of the closet and tell us Bush did it? Seems to be where you?re heading with this. Stop dancing and tell it like you mean it.
 
Why don?t you just come out of the closet and tell us Bush did it? Seems to be where you?re heading with this. Stop dancing and tell it like you mean it.
Click to expand...
because like every politician up on the hill knows, you have to keep the door labeled "plausible deniability" open at all times. 😉
 
there have been many attacks sense, but the EPA keeps it quite so as not to let the "terrorists win".

had a mail in at my school a few months back, EPA closed the library for the day
 
Their was a "person of interest" named in the investigation. Text Not sure what the evidence was against him in particular, but apparently they coudn't make any charges stick.

As for the letters, IIRC, only one contained "weaponized" spores. They did (probably) find out where and how they were made though. Text
 
Originally posted by: Saysys
there have been many attacks sense, but the EPA keeps it quite so as not to let the "terrorists win".

had a mail in at my school a few months back, EPA closed the library for the day
Click to expand...

Attacks or hoaxes?
 
It would seem that weaponized anthrax, which was made in a government laboratory, would have strict controls and that if someone stole some it would be pretty easy to determine who.
 
I don't know what happened. I would like to know. Weren't the letters sent close enough to 9-11 that it might not be a "copy cat" crime?
 
Originally posted by: techs
It would seem that weaponized anthrax, which was made in a government laboratory, would have strict controls and that if someone stole some it would be pretty easy to determine who.
Click to expand...

Not really, it just means whoever made it was clever.

There's not a huge difference between the "weaponized" and normal agent. It's the same bacterial endospores (the DNA may be identical), the weaponized ones are just produced a little differently by whoever's growing them up.
 
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: techs
It would seem that weaponized anthrax, which was made in a government laboratory, would have strict controls and that if someone stole some it would be pretty easy to determine who.
Click to expand...

Not really, it just means whoever made it was clever.

There's not a huge difference between the "weaponized" and normal agent. It's the same bacterial endospores (the DNA may be identical), the weaponized ones are just produced a little differently by whoever's growing them up.
Click to expand...
There is a HUGE difference between the weaponized spores versus natural spores. The natural spores carry a slight charge, which causes them to stick to each other if they're present in a high concentration in one place, which renders them useless as a weapon, since they wouldn't disperse.

The technology to make weaponized spores involves coating them with a microscopic coating which will either homogenize or neutralize the charge, and also will make the spores slick so they don't stick to each other.

It's pretty advanced technology.
 
it was an inside job to increase funding and they succeeded with very little collateral damage.

and thats not just a random conspiracy theory.
 
Originally posted by: Meuge
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: techs
It would seem that weaponized anthrax, which was made in a government laboratory, would have strict controls and that if someone stole some it would be pretty easy to determine who.
Click to expand...

Not really, it just means whoever made it was clever.

There's not a huge difference between the "weaponized" and normal agent. It's the same bacterial endospores (the DNA may be identical), the weaponized ones are just produced a little differently by whoever's growing them up.
Click to expand...
There is a HUGE difference between the weaponized spores versus natural spores. The natural spores carry a slight charge, which causes them to stick to each other if they're present in a high concentration in one place, which renders them useless as a weapon, since they wouldn't disperse.

The technology to make weaponized spores involves coating them with a microscopic coating which will either homogenize or neutralize the charge, and also will make the spores slick so they don't stick to each other.

It's pretty advanced technology.
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the weaponized spores carry a negative electrostatic charge, so they repel each other, making them more flocculent. Thus they'll have an easier time innoculating someone through the aerosol route. Apparently the post 911 weaponized spores just used some silica to do this.

Doesn't seem like a huge change to me - the disease they cause is identical. The "non-weaponized" spores killed people too, so I don't see how they could be called useless.
 
I get the feeling that they were just propaganda incidents designed to scare the American people. Bush and Haliburton got their Iraq war, so no more need.

Look for something else to push the invasion of Iran though.
 
Originally posted by: EatSpam
I get the feeling that they were just propaganda incidents designed to scare the American people. Bush and Haliburton got their Iraq war, so no more need.

Look for something else to push the invasion of Iran though.
Click to expand...

ask your congressman, and they will reply "what is anthrax?"
 
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Their was a "person of interest" named in the investigation. Text Not sure what the evidence was against him in particular, but apparently they coudn't make any charges stick.

As for the letters, IIRC, only one contained "weaponized" spores. They did (probably) find out where and how they were made though. Text
Click to expand...

Oh yeah Now I remember that guy Hatfill.
Had forgotten it was that close to 9-11 also
Hatfill wiki
 
Originally posted by: envy me

This might help.
Click to expand...

will have to read it in its entirety tomorrow as I am short of time but I really would dispute this part:

However, the mailing of the anthrax letters shows a degree of media savvy that would be unusual for foreign Islamic terrorists. The persons who sent the letters knew which media outlets would have the greatest influence on the public. Even today, with the advent of cable and satellite television, the three major television broadcast networks remain as the primary source of news for most Americans. The New York Post and the National Enquirer are tabloid papers and were likely chosen for their sensational headlines. Of all the papers in New York City, the New York Post would have screamed the loudest concerning the threat from Islamic terrorists. For Americans who don?t follow the news, the National Enquirer, with its presence at every checkout stand in America, would convey the message. The desired effect in choosing these media outlets was to alarm the public and to remind them these terrorists wanted to destroy both America and Israel.



As I think that Al Queda has shown a very savvy ability to use and manipulate the media.....( and as to the rest ...will read more tomorrow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top