Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TrebleRebel
the coating matches no known anthrax samples ever recovered from biological-weapons producers anywhere in the world, including Iraq and the former Soviet Union. The combination of the intense milling of the bacteria and the unusual coating produced an anthrax powder so fine and fluffy that individually coated anthrax spores were found in the Leahy envelope, something that U.S. bioweapons experts had never seen."

I remember reading that which is why I've never bought it was a homegrown terrorist. That and the "coincidence" that some of the 9/11 hijackers had what people later recognized as cutaneous anthrax.

10 posted on 07/31/2006 9:11:27 AM PDT by Peach (Prayers for Israel and all who love her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Peach

And yet the statement "the coating matches no known anthrax samples ever recovered from biological-weapons producers anywhere in the world, including Iraq and the former Soviet Union" doesn't it with Alibek's statements to Richard Preston and CBC in 1998. Alibek's 1998 statements sound EXACTLY like the 2001 anthrax powder.

Interestingly, Alibek's comments AFTER the 2001 attacks seem to be geared towards putting as much distance as possible between himself and the technology of silica coatings and amber-gray powders, finer than bath talc, with smooth, creamy particles that tend to fly apart and vanish in the air, becoming invisible and drifting for miles.

Here's some examples:
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa76481.000/hfa76481_0.HTM
Talking about anthrax, I know something about this powder sent to different locations. Unfortunately I cannot disclose my source of information. I saw, let me say, some pictures. Without getting into detail, my first conclusion is that I am convinced this agent and this product cannot be considered as a Russian or an American weapon.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/03/special/world/sp_iraq_alibek033103.htm
A published analysis of the anthrax mailed to government and media in Oct. 2001 shows unambiguously that silicon dioxide was present on the surface of the spores. The work was performed by the AFIP and the results can be seen here.
Does this mean, in your opinion, that the anthrax was made in a state-sponsored bioweapons lab?

Ken Alibek: We paid to much attention to the silicon oxide on the surface of the spores. I haven't seen any silicon presence on micrographs of this anthrax. We shouldn't forget that silica would be a natural component. In this case, in my opinion, silica was a natural presence in these spores. There was no special need to add silica to this anthrax.







11 posted on 07/31/2006 9:20:22 AM PDT by TrebleRebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Peach; jpl; Shermy

Actually, the article does indeed say the Soviets had obtained Ames:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/custom/attack/bal-te.detrick30jul30,0,2597607.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines

Serguei Popov, a scientist once based in a Soviet bioweapons lab in Obolensk, south of Moscow, said that by the early 1980s his colleagues had obtained at least two strains of anthrax commonly studied in Detrick and affiliated labs. They included the Ames strain, first identified at Detrick in the early 1980s. It became the standard used for testing U.S. military vaccines, and it was the strain contained in the 2001 anthrax letters that killed five people and infected 23 in the U.S.


12 posted on 07/31/2006 9:23:06 AM PDT by TrebleRebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson