Replies

If Ed was any kind of analyst as he claims to be he would exepending his energies de-ciphering the Fox News email. Of course, since he doesn't like what the email implies he is instead expending his energies on personal attacks on anybody who writes about the email.

Sent: Tuesday June 27 2006 7:38 AM
Subject: PDF images

(1) xxxxxx was giving his opinion on xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ?
(2) ? examine all of the letter spore powder samples. He said like XXXX
(3) ??????. Then he said he had to look at a lot of samples that the FBI had
(4) letter material. Then the bombshell, He said that the best duplication
(5) was if ???? ??????? ?????? ??????? exactly about looking at ?
(6) xxxxxx coming on and ????? ??????? xxx ??? him if this powder
(7) his knees got shaky and he sputtered “But I told the General we didn’t
(8) investigators that xxxxxxx was involved in some way in the letter incident
(9) was finding it was actually funny. The sentences were quite ????? ??
(10) words and phrases xxx said that xxxx was the worst Commander
(11) just believe that I had heard xx had made Ames spore powder just
(12)?? heard that xxxxxxx either knew about it or was behind it and that
(13) ???

There is indeed a lot to analyze in the Fox News email. For starters - the email implies that the total cast of unknown Detrick characters involved in some way in the email is at least 6. All of these people have an identity. 6 is a big number, and this secret is not going to remain secret for ever. And when the secret is out Ed can plan is next book “To Err is Human - Why My First Anthrax Book Was Completely Wrong”.

Cast of unknown characters:

(1) The sender of the email
(2) The recipient of the email (of course, could be more than 1 person)
(3) The person who looked at the samples the FBI had produced and said that the best match was to the powder made by Mr Redacted.
(4) Mr Redacted himself.
(5) The person whose knees got shaky when told by the person in (3) that the best match was to Mr Redacted’s powder.
(6) The Commander referred to as the “worst Commander”.

If Ed was any kind of analyst as he claims to be he would exepending his energies de-ciphering the Fox News email.

I find it very interesting that you not only feel I should believe as you believe, but you also feel I should do things the way you do things. And if I don't, then I'm automatically wrong.

If you are deciphering the letter, why on earth would I waste my time doing it, too?

If there was anything of great value in the email, why would FOX ignore it? They have an unblurred copy. Their article about it shows that the ONLY thing of value they could find in it was that someone mistakenly gave General Parker some bad information. Here's what the article says about the email:

But in an e-mail obtained by FOX News, scientists at Fort Detrick openly discussed how the anthrax powder they were asked to analyze after the attacks was nearly identical to that made by one of their colleagues.

"Then he said he had to look at a lot of samples that the FBI had prepared ... to duplicate the letter material," the e-mail reads. "Then the bombshell. He said that the best duplication of the material was the stuff made by [name redacted]. He said that it was almost exactly the same … his knees got shaky and he sputtered, 'But I told the General we didn't make spore powder!'"

So, some guy at Ft. Detrick made a mistake. Big deal. He saw a powder sample that was "nearly identical" to that made by one of his colleagues. And it was "it was almost exactly the same."

SO WHAT?

That does NOT prove anything. It CERTAINLY does not prove that this other person made the attack anthrax. All it proves is that on top of all the other mistakes being made back then, someone made one more.

You seem to feel I should believe as you believe, work as you work, and get excited when you get excited. Sorry, I don't see things that way.

Ed at www.anthraxinvestigation.com