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

To: ZacandPook; TrebleRebel; EdLake

http://www.newstimeslive.com/news/story.php?id=1186570878&source=big_barker

“That’s one of the challenges of anthrax,” said Jennifer Nuzzo, a senior analyst at the Center for Biosecurity at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. “The spores are very resistant.”

The 2001 letters — while scary — did not involve weaponized anthrax, Nuzzo said.

“To weaponize it, you make it more lethal. It has to make people sicker, or stay in the air longer, so more people breath it in,” Nuzzo said,

_________

As Van Harp, former head of Amerithrax once said, in using the term “weaponization,” people should define the term. It has a specific two-prong definition, Van Harp said.

The anthrax, by any one’s definition, was processed in such a way that made it float like a butterfly and sting like a bee. With the Daschle and Leahy product being highly concentrated.


585 posted on 09/09/2007 5:18:47 AM PDT by ZacandPook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies ]


To: ZacandPook
Hmmm. The Danbury News-Times article also says this:

When it turned up on Padanaram Road in Danbury last week, it was a shock -- there hadn't been case of the disease in the entire state in nearly 40 years.

They seem to have totally forgotten about Ottilie Lundgren.

But it's another example of how you cannot totally rely upon what you read in the media. Even hard-working and well-meaning newspaper reporters who do a lot of research for an article can make simple mistakes.

Ed at www.anthraxinvestigation.com

589 posted on 09/09/2007 9:57:24 AM PDT by EdLake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 585 | View Replies ]

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