Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anthrax Preparation Indicates Home-Grown Origin
New Scientist ^

Posted on 10/30/2001 8:40:44 AM PST by Asmodeus

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 10/30/2001 8:40:44 AM PST by Asmodeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Does anyone know what organization is behind Newscientist?

I smell an agenda here, but I'd like to find evidence before poisoning the well.

2 posted on 10/30/2001 8:44:07 AM PST by GEC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: Asmodeus
Don't we have lots of Muslim students in the various "science" classes throughout the country? I bet the majority of them are NOT in liberal arts.
4 posted on 10/30/2001 8:45:54 AM PST by lds23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GEC
Agenda? The New Scientist? Are you kidding?

Obviously you don't know the rag. It is a totally PC, socialist oriented, US hating, peacenik, piece of crap. It is most empahatically NOT a source for scientific information.

5 posted on 10/30/2001 8:50:10 AM PST by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lds23
Not only that but New Scientist reveals that further analysis actually reveals that the type of chemical preparation could only have come from right wing fanatics or their supporters in the biomedical community.
6 posted on 10/30/2001 8:51:38 AM PST by epluribus_2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
I just haven't seen them before the anthrax scare.

Who funds them, or is it just the magazine?

If they're saying that Iraq was not involved then it would be a good idea to nuke Baghdad...yesterday.

But I can wait.

7 posted on 10/30/2001 8:52:56 AM PST by GEC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Clinton's been selling more secrets....:)
8 posted on 10/30/2001 9:09:29 AM PST by Deanna Knapp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GEC
I agree, this reeks of AGENDA. By the way, anyone sharp enough to notice that CNN gave away the secret ingerdient to aerosolizing Anthrax on their broadcast last night. I was nearly floored. I will not mention what it is here, but it is cheap and readily available to anyone. I suspect that those who want to know already do.
9 posted on 10/30/2001 9:10:14 AM PST by lafroste
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GEC
I've mentioned in a previous post (somewhere) that a friend of mine is a Police Chief of a Twin Cities suburb. He's gone through countless briefings, had to respond to anthrax scares, etc. The buzz among his peers is that the Anthrax is being generated internally and probably has nothing to do with any outside terrorist groups. Think McVeigh or Unibomber. He also said that Anthrax has shown up before, but never really covered in the media for whatever reason.

No verification - just stating his opinion. That's all.

10 posted on 10/30/2001 9:11:56 AM PST by danzaroni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: epluribus_2
I just knew those political spores would give us away!!
11 posted on 10/30/2001 9:14:25 AM PST by KirkandBurke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Well, I, for one, am sticking with the FBI's entirely reasonable explanation that any right-wing fanatic nutcase P.H.D. (Producer of Heinous Diseases) could whip up a batch in a week's time using his Suzy Homemaker Easy-Bake Oven to dry it, and a combination of Cling-Free and a Salad Shooter to weaponize it. It just don't make sense that Saddam would be involved, since he is so busy making baby milk to feed his starving children...
12 posted on 10/30/2001 10:24:03 AM PST by Excuse_Me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GEC; Asmodeus; John Valentine; Betty Jo; Wallaby; BlueDogDemo; roughrider; LSJohn; honway...
I see a major flaws in the conclusion reached by this article.

The statement "New Scientist can reveal that the spores also seem to have been prepared according to the secret US 'weaponisation' recipe" over reaches by trying to claim more than what it can at this time. This over reaching is even demonstrated by a sentence later in the same article:

"Chemical tests are now being conducted to see if any traces of the US additives are present." This means the results of the chemical tests are not yet known.

The article emphasizes spore size distribution as the link it tries to make with US anthrax that has been weaponized:

"...so that when they were dried, they broke up into fine particles within a very narrow size range of a few microns."

First of all, the article admits that the Russian, US and Iraqi methods can give the right size distribution.:

"The Soviet Union got around this by grinding dried cultures along with chemicals that cause the particles to remain separate. Iraq is the only other state known to have tried making such a weapon, and it dried anthrax cultures along with bentonite, a clay used as a fluidising agent in powders. " But the article tries to rule out the Iraqi connection by claiming bentonite was not found on the spores. Yet,it has not been ruled out yet whether or not ANY type of clay besides just bentonite was on the spores which would still give the spores an Iraqi signature since the Iraqis also used OTHER CLAYS in addition to bentonite. The Iraqi process relied on CLAYS in general, not just bentonite.

Additionally, since chemical tests are still being conducted how is it that the article totally rules out Russian methods which use chemicals since the chemical tests results are not in yet? The Russians may have learned not to have to grind their spores. The article tries to rule out the Russians by claiming that grinding would not give the size distribution found in the Dascle sample that they claim is close to the US method size distribution-that claim is not shown or proven in this article and the Russians still can be a candidate in my opinion.

This article, by saying that the size distribution is close to the distribution produced by US methods, does not make a case at all that the sample is home grown because it is possible to achieve the same distribution with Russian and Iraqi methods. Use of Clays have not been ruled out yet and the results of chemical tests are not in which could show the spores were produced by the Russian or the US chemical methods IF the right chemicals are even found.

This article is NOT good science- it is purely political which makes it suspect because the article source name is a scientific name. And the source is also known to be a left leaning magazine with less than reliable agendas.

THe Russians and Iraqi's would have a strong motive to have this article written with misdirection to deflect attention away from them. The Russian mob could easily have provided Anthrax to BIn Laden and there are numerous articles reporting that Bin Laden did in fact purchase some anthrax from the Russian mob and/or satellite states. The Iraqis could easily have provided anthrax to hijacker pilot Atta during many meetings he has had with Iraqi officials over the past year as has been widely reported. Sadam Hussein would like to keep his stockpiles of anthrax and other weapons of mass destruction from being targeted should Iraq be identified as the source.

What is to say that the Iraqis or Russians were not able to achieve the right size distribution using clays and or chemicals or both similar to what the US used-the US secrets may not be secret plus the Russians and Iraqis could have made their own discoveries of methods to yield the right size distribution.

THe right size distribution has not been a secret in the world to anyone and many nations could have done experiments to achieve the right size distribution. More than one method can achieve the same size distribution.

It will take an analysis and testing of a combination of factors (clays, strains, chemicals, particle size distribution, etc) ultimately to tie down the source of the anthrax production.

13 posted on 10/30/2001 4:56:27 PM PST by OKCSubmariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: OKCSubmariner; aristeides; Plummz
Thanks for the informed discrediting of this junk science piece.

I have some junk science for you. It's off topic, but two hours ago my friend Paul said he had a dream last night that the Holland Tunnel was blown up and thousands perished. Sorry, I didn't know where else to post this. No need to reply. I only post it because Paul has had a number of dreams turn out to be true over the past few years. He's hoping he's wrong on this one too. He called it a dream; I'd call it a nightmare.

14 posted on 10/30/2001 5:07:18 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
Why Drudge feels the need to CONSTANTLY link to this crap, I'll never know. It ain't news. It's the same know-nothing sources, spewing the same propeganda, all to serve the same purpose: blame the right, even if it means ignoring the left's long, illustrious history of domestic terrorism (Unibomber, RUCKUS, EarthFIRST!, PETA, the Mumia movement, Manson, NARAL, etc. etc, etc...)

Hey Matt, I know you lurk here. What's the deal? The singular aim of all of these stories is pin this on Pro-Lifers. 120 hoax letters show up at Planned Parenthood in two days? Give me a break. It's so obviously fake it's insulting. Why are you giving these people the credibility of linking their bogus conspiracies on your site?

And why in God's name would hold John "This War is a Fraud" Pilger up as the voice of the British press (as you did on Sunday)? Slow newsday? A quick Google search of Mr. Pilger turns up about a dozen essays by a devout socialist who has condemned every military action in this nation's history. There was an interview with Noam Chomsky in there, too. The man and his headline represent nothing... nothing that we didn't already know. Socialist hate us. Big f**king deal.

Your lust for attention-grabbing headlines is turning you inside-out, Matt.

15 posted on 10/30/2001 5:22:14 PM PST by cgk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: golitely
BTTT and please see reply #13
16 posted on 10/30/2001 6:07:43 PM PST by OKCSubmariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: OKCSubmariner; Fred Mertz
I wonder who instructed the New Scientist what line to take, or did they decide on their own what the proper line was.
17 posted on 10/30/2001 6:42:45 PM PST by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Asmodeus
The primary sources of American weapons anthrax are University and Government Labs. The primary workers in these facilities, especially the Universities, are FOREIGN STUDENTS on STUDENT VISAS. It takes no stretch of logic to realize that American anthrax could have been stolen by these students and passed on to bin Laden and his followers.

That's the source. Not 'Right Wing Extremists'.

18 posted on 10/30/2001 7:13:56 PM PST by jimkress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lds23
Yes, we do. In my summer Visual Basic class was a Turk who already had a 4 year degree from back in his country. He was here getting a Computer Degree. Most muslims are here getting Sci/Med/Engineering degrees.

I'd like to know why colleges and Universities love the almighty dollar more than they love their fellow Americans? Admitting all these foreigners for their ability to pay is a testimony to their loyalties.

19 posted on 10/30/2001 7:22:41 PM PST by Florida native
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: danzaroni
See the most recent issue of the Weekly Standard for why the domestic theory is a pipe dream. It would be nice to think that we aren't at war, but we are. The illusion of peace evaporated with the towers in NYC two months ago.

Link here to Weekly Standard article.

20 posted on 10/30/2001 8:17:57 PM PST by GEC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson