First one says antibiotic, "Penacilin", doesn't say what for. Second says anthrax.
Would an American scientist or such warn to use penicillin? Not the American-recommended treatment. But used in less sophisticated countries.
So, the perp didn't care a lot.
Why the letters say this? I don't have all the answers but wouldn't the perp say something to call attention to the message? If atrax just went around, would an AQ or such terrorists feel his message was made?
BTW, AQ never says "it's us, AQ!" But the message is sent other ways. What would an AQ terrorist say?
The first message didn't get the point across, so the perp targeted, for the last time, political officials, and specifically said "anthrax." The writing was also more controlled reflecting the perp's intention to make this batch work (doesn't preclude fake Islamist, though).
Would the perp faking an Islamist terrorist know how to fake the sloping envelope lines indicative of a person normally trained to write right to left? Fake islamist knows about America and Israel...but what about the "afraid" angle? Part of the fear psychology of the Islamist mind, though maybe a faker could have picked it up off TV after 9/11.
The mailer could have killed far more people by surreptitiously dispersing it. And it would have been clear it was anthrax, eventually.
But did the mailer have enough for such an attack? And it would be clear it's anthrax...eventually. Is "eventually" what an AQ terrorist wants? And would anonymous dousing be effectively linked to AQ and it's message?
And had far more terror effect.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe other plans for other things were in the works. And if they followed the Aum Shinrikyo example, they learned that Aum's public disbursement of atrax didn't work.
But, it's essentially the "PC" of FR to blindly toe the AQ line on the anthrax attacks and simply make snide mocking comments to anything that even remotely hints of anything to the contrary,
I'm open to other theories, and don't discount yours. But I've seen so many "remote hints" that are so laughable, and so much proposed by the govt., that I question them from the onset. Ask yourself, if you ran the government, and wanted to keep people calm, which story would you tell?
and basically blindly ignore the above, the fact the only government targets were Democratic senators, etc.
The "etc." is what? New York Post was hit, they're conservative and pro-Israel, vocally. Ask yourself, if Democrats were specifically hit, who else other than "right wing guy" would so target? Despite what one might read on FR, democrats were associated with supporting Israel, not republicans. Bush had much Arab support before 9/11. His family is old friends with the shieks.
Daschle is an obvious target being a big name. Why Leahy? Maybe the perp has Vermont contacts. Or maybe, as Pokerbuddy0 has found, Leahy and his "Leahy Law" would be especially odious to AQ and Arab govts. Or the perp just saw their faces a lot on TV after 9/11. Wouldn't right wing guy target the big bugaboo of a Vermont senator - Jumpin' Jim Jeffords?
Anyways, I don't totally discount the "domestic-domestic" theory. I find it flaky. And it is over-reported compared to other theories. Just as flaky as the govt's attempts to claim that Hadayet at the Los Angeles Airport wasn't a terrorist attack. Why they say it? Airline industry worries.
"...Asked why their had been no other attacks, Mason said, "I suppose the leading thought might be the person didn't intend to cause harm, and did."
Jeez, the mailer, whoever he was, KNEW he killed Stevens before he mailed the second batch!