Replies

For arguments sake lets say Hatfield did it. I do not think he did. He is a doctor and would have access to the
Antibiotic that will prevent anthrax. If he worked with this agent in his profession he would have had the option of taking the vaccination that prevents anthrax. He would not need a glove box to load envelopes and thus leave a trail of incriminating evidence. He would merely need to load the envelopes in an isolated area, insert the envelopes into a zip lock bag, bathe in a creek or lake, dispose of his clothes, put on new ones, and drive back home. His envelopes would be ready to go whenever he decided to unzip the bag and drop it in a mailbox.

The scenario we are reading in the papers is bizzare.

The scenario we are reading in the papers is bizzare.

That's because this is just a made-up, BS talking point which is being disseminated right now to give a booster shot to the "domestic" theory of the anthrax. A few weeks ago, as the war in Iraq was winding down, there was another flurry of anthrax-related news stories with the same basic "take home" message. Supposedly, US Army scientists had discovered, after 18 months of trials, that the anthrax sent with the mail threats following 9/11 could have been weaponized simply by a private individual, without the resources of the state.

Now, ask yourself what might be the purpose of pushing this line now, in the wake of the resolution of the Iraq situation. I suggest the answer to that question is the same as the answer to the following: Why did the administration go to such lengths to sell us the story that we were personally targeting Saddam during the Iraq campaign? Who will be arrested first, Hatfill or Saddam? Or will neither of them ever be arrested?