Posted on 05/09/2007 11:45:04 AM PDT by drzz
Here is video of FBI Director’s 2005 briefing on the Amerithrax probe.
Mueller On Anthrax Probe
CBS News RAW: F.B.I. Director Robert Mueller spoke about the investigation into the anthrax attacks four years ago and the potential for future threats, during a September news conference.
You can get to it from this link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/22/national/main1338657.shtml
Ah, so I guess my attempted joke about your statement was received as not merely offensive but also as meaningless. But it was simply meant as a joke, there was no intention to make a serious statement or to offend. Sorry if it seemed otherwise.
Ed, you said you wanted ne to consider the facts underlying your theory. The main aspects of your theory is that a Central NJ microbiologist divorcee’s 1st grader wrote the letters and that the perp intended to “sound an alarm.”
You explained his theory in January 2001 on alt.conspiracy.
Ed writes:
“Have you looked at the web site of the Federation of American
Scientists? Barbara Rosenberg says almost the same thing that I
say. Except she believes that the American scientist works in the
Washington D.C. area. The FAS site is here: “
So it is just a statement of fact — not accusation — that you viewed your theory as almost the same as the theory urged by Dr. Rosenberg in her December 2002 website. Although it was not an official FAS position, the FAS could fill a bus with the number of Nobel laureates it has and so you were in fine company.
You say she said “almost the same thing” with the difference that her person worked in the Washington, D.C. area.” As of January 2002, your person, you suggested , lived “either in New York City or within commuting distance.” You then changed it to refer to Central New Jersey. Perhaps the imagined perpetrator moved to near Princeton, the place of mailng, or perhaps you were just unaware initially where he had lived at the time of mailing.
BHR’s theorized motive is fine, Ed — “sound the alarm etc.” — as is yours. So there is no need for you to get defensive.
You explained the origin of your child theory in mid-December 2001 in the summary changes to your webpages:
“December 9, 2001: Richard M. Smith provided me with a link (now expired) to a page that provided comments by Senator Daschle that the government now (more or less) officially thinks that the anthrax terrorist is a former member of the US military. In addition, I was provided with a link that says that the FBI is fully aware that some or all of the letters are photocopies. Plus, a comment by “Debby” on the alt.true-crime newsgroup that the anthrax terrorist’s ex-wife might read supermarket tabloids caused me realize that the anthrax letters could actually have been written by a small child - just as they appear. It’s a big stretch in speculation, but the letters could have been written by a child belonging to the terrorist, and the child may also have addressed the envelopes. I added speculation about that to the page. “
You also announced the particulars of the “profile” of the person you suspected to newsgroups.
You wrote:
“Dec 17 2001, 11:34 am
The FBI has developed a profile of the anthrax terrorist, but
they are playing it safe out of fear of being ridiculed if they
speculate too much. I have no such fear. I love to speculate.
From my web page at http://extra.newsguy.com/~detect/anthrax.html
here is my profile of the anthrax terrorist:
1. He’s between ages 30 and 60. [later changed to in his 40s]
2. He formerly worked for the US military in a biological
weapons program.
3. He currently works in the Health Industry.
4. He lives in New York City or within commuting distance of
NYC. [later changed to living in Central NJ]
5. He traveled to Indianapolis, Indiana, sometime prior to Sept.
11, 2001. [later omitted, I believe]
6. He drove to Trenton, New Jersey, on Sept. 18 and on October
9, 2001.
7. He reads the New York Post.
8. He probably watches Tom Brokaw for his evening news.
9. He probably subscribes to cable.
10. He probably watches Bill O’Reilly on the Fox News Channel.
11. He lives alone.
12. He finds it difficult to get along with others and may have
a tendency to say things like “I keep telling them but the just
don’t listen!” or “I just don’t understand how people can think
that way!”
13. He may read supermarket tabloids, but more likely he
considers them trash and ridicules the people who read such
things because they are reading nonsense while ignoring what is
“real”. It’s also very possible that it’s his ex-wife who reads
the tabloids.
14. He is probably American born and an American citizen. But
if he is originally from another country, it would be a country
where English is not the primary language nor the alphabet, but
which has more experience with terrorism.
15. He may have some connection to the publication of a
newsletter that expresses his beliefs.
16. He votes Republican.
17. He is probably divorced as a result of the stress of losing
his job with the military.
18. He has a small child and has visitation rights with the
child.
19. He used his child to address the envelopes and to write the
letters.
20. The child is home schooled.
All the details behind this profile are on my web page at
http://extra.newsguy.com/~detect/anthrax.html
Ed “
You explained in another post in groups:
“The BTWC information is just another piece in a long series of pieces that
makes it a near certainty that an American scientist was behind the
anthrax attacks. And on my web site there is probably enough information
to identify him - if the right person were to read it. That “right
person” would have to be someone who knows the terrorist but who never
actually looked at what information is available about the terrorist.
Ed”
When I went to turn to consider your theory at his urging this past week on Free Republic, you got extremely upset. But IMO you only find it threatening that I do not credit that someone would ask a 1st grader living with his ex-wife to write a terrorist threat letter. I don’t know ex-wives, but I know 1st graders. They can’t keep a secret, especially from their mom. So the theory was always silly from the start.
So you don’t really want people — or at least me — to consider your self-described speculation. You just wants to market your self-described speculation as what you now describe as FACT (capitals are yours) for a half decade . Meanwhile, your stated purpose is to have people who know the scientist “actually look[] at what information is available about the terrorist.”
Meanwhile, if you are wrong, Al Qaeda may attack, authorities say, with aerosolized anthrax. Ed, you never had any FACTS supporting his theory — you just had your theory and beliefs. And you borrowed that from BHR.
Isn’t what you are doing exactly what you criticize BHR for doing? She never named anyone. The only difference is that she got an audience with Senate staffers and you didn’t.
A profile should be built around a crime not a person. Your approach turns criminal profiling on its head. A threat assessment relating to Ayman Zawahiri OTOH is just that — an assessment of the threat, an attempt to judge the probabilities etc.
http://www.anthraxandalqaeda.com
Back in December 2001 and January 2002 you had the self-awareness that your theory was rank speculation. It still is,
“The FBI has developed a profile of the anthrax terrorist, but
they are playing it safe out of fear of being ridiculed if they
speculate too much. I have no such fear. I love to speculate.”
On the alt.true-crime newsgroup, he noted that same day:
“Debby,
Your comment that it was his ex-wife who reads the tabloids really got me to
thinking, and I mentioned that comment on my web page at
http://extra.newsguy.com/~detect/anthrax.html
I don’t know how young the child is, but he/she would have to be young enough to not realize what was happening. It’s a really great theory. I’d been trying to figure out how he could get a kid to write the letters for him, and then your comment made it clear: he used his own kid! It’s probably just wild speculation, but it sure fits.
Thanks for the feedback. I really appreciate it.
Ed”
In contrast to who you correctly note is “wild speculation,” an Al Qaeda theory starts with documentary evidence of a stated intent to use weaponized anthrax against US targets in retaliation for the rendering of EIJ leaders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.