Maybe the first case was to point the investigation TO the terrorists rather than the skinhead here using the attack as a cover for his terrorist activity. Those so intent on preventing others from investigating possible home grown terrorism may also be trying to prevent the spotlight uncovering the fact that these radical elements in the U.S. are INDEED terrorists and will be treated as terrorists meaning that the laws covering terrorism will apply to the one doing the anthrax attacks.
But the first case was announced BEFORE it was publically known that the hijackers had been close to or even in contact with the victim and his wife. That means the "skinhead" had to have known about the hijacking BEFORE it happened which means he must be part of the group.
Those so intent on preventing others from investigating possible home grown terrorism may also be trying to prevent the spotlight uncovering the fact that these radical elements in the U.S. are INDEED terrorists and will be treated as terrorists meaning that the laws covering terrorism will apply to the one doing the anthrax attacks.
Oh there may be copycats in the US but make no mistake ... the first case is much too coincidentally linked to the FOREIGN terrorists to be anything other than linked to the FOREIGN terrorists. And if that is the case, then Occam's razor suggests that most of the other cases were too ... especially since the letters came from an area in New Jersey where we KNOW that many of the FOREIGN terrorists were prior to the WTC attack.
More likely all this talk by the Government of it being a domestic terrorist is meant to keep people from focusing on the real source (IRAQ?) because THEN the government would have to do something about it. Or perhaps it is to keep Iraq off balance so that when something is done about it, it will come more as a surprise to Iraq?