This is just a guess, but I suspect that this "evidence" consists of you seeing hidden ghostly images in the photos of the anthrax letters, images which you feel are pictures of the culprits. I've had a number of people contacts me about their beliefs that there are hidden images in the photos of the anthrax letters. To see an example, CLICK HERE. (In reality, the "images" are most likely just compression artifacts which are caused by using a bad compression ratio when compressing .TIF images down to .JPG images and then decompressing the .JPG images again. The random compression artifacts are like ink blot tests which tell us more about thought processes of the person seeing the images than what is actually in the images.)
All the people who see these "hidden images" complain that the FBI won't take them seriously. I wonder why. One guy saw a camel with a bowl on its back and steam coming out of the bowl. He wanted the FBI to investigate the meaning of that image.
The keys to this case are the deaths of Otillie Lundgren and Cathy Nguyen. They have something in common and the FBI was informed of this
Yes, it was reported that they both used the same perfume which they purchased from Walgreens. So, evidently that must indicate some kind of connection. It can't just be the meaningless fact that a lot of older women shop at Walgreens and buy their perfumes there.
Ed is nothing more than a Hatfill apologist at best.
It's interesting that you consider me a "Hatfill apologist" because I say the facts indicate that Dr. Hatfill had nothing to do with the anthrax mailings. And ZacandPook seems to consider me a "al Qaeda apologist" because I say the facts indicate that al Qaeda had nothing to do with the anthrax mailings.
That must mean I'm also a "Saddam Hussein apologist" because I say the facts indicate that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the anthrax mailings.
And I must also be an "FBI apologist" because I say the facts indicate that they are right about there being no coatings on the spores.
I apologize if I've missed any others for whom I am an "apologist." :-)
Ed writes:
“And ZacandPook seems to consider me a “al Qaeda apologist” because I say the facts indicate that al Qaeda had nothing to do with the anthrax mailings.”
Given we have corresponded regularly for 5 years, you have no basis for saying this. What I’ve said is that you never have addressed an Al Qaeda theory, and that you avoid critical analysis by endlessly invoking your ad hominem “conspiracy theorist” and “true believer” labels. (for example, see your posts above in this thread)
You don’t know enough about Ayman or his anthrax program to comment meaningfully about Amerithrax, which is odd given that you have been told by the FBI Director that they have aggressively pursued an Al Qaeda theory.
But go ahead, give it a try.
Your key argument that the hijackers were all “dead, dead, dead” is very lame.
It took a lot of digging, but I found one source. The "report" I found is from the CDC. To view it, CLICK HERE.
Here's the passage:
When she [Lundgren] was compared with the 10th case-patient [Nguyen] with inhalational anthrax in New York City, limited similarities were found: both were women >60 years of age, lived alone in clean homes, wore hats, and had a bottle of the same brand of perfume (which was sampled for the presence of B. anthracis). They had no brand of medication, physicians, hobbies, social networks, or geographic area in common.
There's another source somewhere which says they both bought their perfume at Walgreens.
Note that the CDC says the perfume was sampled for the presence of Bacillus anthracis. So, any theory that they were killed by anthrax in their perfume has no basis.
