Oh God, he's on to me.........
As illustrated by the rest of the passage at 167-168 in Draper’s Bush biography, what Ari meant was that after the months of an operating presumption of a foreign tie to the anthrax (9/11 link). By the end of the year, they were thinking that the anthrax was a US-based operation from supporters not connected to 9/11. Everyone just misinterpreted what they meant by “domestic” —as Ashcroft has also explained.
Ari wasn’t suggesting it was taken by A from a Lab and then mailed by A’s friend B, such as your theory.
For example, that would merely be analogous to where you had your friend make all the deletions to Wikipedia while feigning that you had an interest only in the “facts.”(You don’t deny it). Yet note that all the stuff added by TrebleRebel (or whoever) that your accomplice deleted was factually incontrovertible and fully proper pursuant to Wikipedia protocol.
When an allegation is made that A and B have operated pursuant to an agreement like that, it is a “conspiracy theory.” Thus, your theory is a conspiracy theory — as is my theory of the recent subterfuge involving the Wiki passages on the anthrax mailings. (Such deletions of indisputably correct and relevant material just result in the other person’s time spent in good faith being wasted.)
Admittedly, the risk of alleging a conspiracy theory is absent direct evidence of an agreement, the inference of an agreement may be faulty. So I am asking you now to confess as I asked you privately. I respect you as a man of integrity and will take you at your word. But please address the issue so I can show TrebleRebel how a mystery is solved. (A mystery is best resolved by direct respectful engagement, not subterfuge or mean words or irrelevant pictures. TrebleRebel’s pictures address some deep-rooted insecurity he has on the subject of his attractiveness given TrebleRebel’s pattern baldness and beer belly). Badabing is a good woman to stand by him given the whole dental thing and bad breath going on.
P.S. If you can appreciate how upset Bush was on October 4, consider that Greenspan was faced with anthrax contamination in December 2001 and then May 2002 — involving correspondence addressed to him. Then there was a May 2003 false scare. So now check out what Greenspan has to say.
... even if not as dramatic as his comment that the invasion of Iraq was all about oil.
Attorney General Ashcroft once explained that an “either-or” approach is not useful. The media has tended to overlook the fact that when the FBI uses the word “domestic” the word includes a U.S.-based, highly-educated supporter of the militant Islamists.
You need to stop babbling and start making sense. If you address a message to both me and TrebelRebel, you need to clarify who you mean when you say "you."
I've made some recent changes to the Wikipedia entry for the Anthrax Attacks of 2001. I even put a comment on my web site about it.
I make more changes today. My IP address shows up as 65.29.180.145. Unlike TrebleRebel, I make no secret about who I am. I do things openly.
Only one change that I made was deleted, and that was done by 76.184.217.42 (someone in Texas). He deleted facts stated by Douglas Beecher because I said they contradicted what Gary Matsumoto wrote. So, I put back Beecher's statements and just said they contradicted the reports that only sophisticated powders are dangerous. I left out Matsumoto's name.
Oh God, he's on to me.........