[Southack]

"The false claims were mostly made by the MEDIA and by scientists who were just speculating about what the MEDIA told them."

That's incorrect. Two different military labs found the same thing independently, stated it, and put the names of their supervisors onto the public reports of the strain/purity/weaponization.

Those aren't errors, and no lab, certainly not some byline buried deep in a bungled FBI report, has the credibility to challenge the two military labs' analysis.

[TrebleRebel]

You nailed Ed Lake. He likes to spread false information that it was all just a big misunderstanding with the media. Of course you are correct. There are dozens of named Federal officials who stated silica was used as an additive.
The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) published a Newsletter in October 2002 (1 year after the attcks) stating that silica was a key additive of the powder sent to yourself. They used a technique of SEM/EDX to determine this. The persons responsible for this work were Florabel Mullick, Frank Johnson, Victor Kalasinsky and Marie Jenkins. They relate this finding here: http://www.afip.org/images/public/nl081002.pdf

[EdLake]

"The false claims were mostly made by the MEDIA and by scientists who were just speculating about what the MEDIA told them."

That's incorrect. Two different military labs found the same thing independently, stated it, and put the names of their supervisors onto the public reports of the strain/purity/weaponization.

Which two labs were those?

AFIP (The Armed Forces Institutes of Pathology) detected silicon and oxygen in the anthrax and ASSUMED it was some kind of silica additive. But no one SAW any additives under a TEM or SEM. AFIP put their FALSE ASSUMPTIONS into a self-serving newsletter. It wasn't any kind of official report.

Ed

www.anthraxinvestigation.com