One topic mentioned in my Sunday comment on February 26 was the argument I've been having with an Anthrax Truther on this blog. It's probably the first time I've ever gotten a Truther to explain his beliefs, and it was very illuminating.
He argued that the reason there are some traced over characters in the anthrax letter sent to the media is because, in Hebrew writing, "1)straight horizontal lines tend to be extra thick" and "2)straight vertical lines tend to be the thinnest line."
In other words, the writer was trying to imitate writing in Hebrew.
I pointed out to the Truther that the thick and thin form of writing is brush-stroke-calligraphy and has nothing to do with normal writing done with a pencil or modern pen.
The Truther went silent for a day or two and then countered by writing this:
"So if you ARE trying to print something in Latin letters and yet give it a 'pseudoHebrew' style, the way to go is to follow the thickness/thinness style of that first "book print" Aleph, and to do that for ALL the letters which you wish to give that style."
And, of course, I pointed out that "the writer of the anthrax letters did NOT do it with ALL the letters. The writer wasn't consistent with highlighting A's and T's. The T's in DEATH are not highlighted. The A in TAKE is not highlighted, neither is the A in AMERICA or the second A in ALLAH nor the A in ISRAEL."
Any theory about the highlighted characters in the media letter has to explain the following:
1. Why are the first and last characters in the first and last lines highlighted?
2. Why is the A in the misspelled word "PENACILIN" highlighted instead of the A in "TAKE"?
3. Why are only T's and A's clearly highlighted.
4. Why aren't all T's and A's highlighted?
5. Why does every sentence in the letter consist of only three words?
The Anthrax Truther's theory answers none of those questions. The only theory that does answer all five questions is the theory provided by the FBI HERE.
In my Sunday comments, I also mentioned that I'm working on creating a couple pdf files that will show the photographs of Ivins' lab and office that I received via an FOIA request. I created a 2 page test file HERE. It looks like a good way to do it.
Other subjects I mentioned in my Sunday comments were the Portland hoax letters, the continuing attack on my web site from someone in Kazakhstan, and the statement in former Senator Russ Feingold's new book which says this about the anthrax attacks of 2001: "We may never know who really committed this crime."
It seems to me that all that is needed to "know" who committed the crime is to look at the facts. But, some seem to need an "official" finding of some kind -- a different official finding than that which has already been provided. But, would they accept any "official" finding if it doesn't agree with their beliefs? History has definitely indicated that they will not.
The Purpose of this blog is to allow people to intelligently debate the comments I make on my web site at www.anthraxinvestigation.com.
All post are moderated. My hours are 9-5.
Please choose "Name/URL" in the "Comment as:" box and fill in a unique name, like "John Doe" or "Anonymous #4972." You can leave the URL blank.
Questions? My email address is detect (at) newsguy (dot) com
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Feb. 19 - Feb. 25, 2012 Discussions
The first topic mentioned in my regular Sunday comment on my web site for February 19 was the connections between Ivins, the KKG sorority and places named "Monmouth." In arguments on this interactive blog, it is more circumstantial evidence connecting Ivins to the attacks that Anthrax Truthers who are "in denial" don't see as being evidence at all.
The second topic was the discovery that Franklin Park, NJ, the town used in the return address on the senate envelopes was just ten miles farther than Princeton along the Lincoln Highway on the way from Frederick, MD, to Newark, NJ. That suggests that Franklin Park was probably where Ivins planned to mail the letters. But, when he reached Princeton, he either spent too much time looking over the KKG office or he simply figured he'd driven far enough and needed to turn around and head home again. So, he mailed the letters in Princeton.
I also realized that the reason that there was no return address on the media letters may have been because the child doing the writing wrote too large, and perhaps ruined an envelope or two before Ivins decided to just use the destination addresses on the envelopes to NBC, CBS, ABC, AMI and the New York Post.
In my Sunday comment, I also mentioned that there has been no dispute of any kind regarding my discovery that the Emerson radio/CD player in Ivins' lab was most likely a "nanny cam" TV spy camera.
And, I also mentioned once again that Anthrax Truthers do not agree with each other about who sent the anthrax letters. But, they ignore that fact in order to appear united in their belief that the FBI was wrong in naming Ivins as the anthrax mailer.
The second topic was the discovery that Franklin Park, NJ, the town used in the return address on the senate envelopes was just ten miles farther than Princeton along the Lincoln Highway on the way from Frederick, MD, to Newark, NJ. That suggests that Franklin Park was probably where Ivins planned to mail the letters. But, when he reached Princeton, he either spent too much time looking over the KKG office or he simply figured he'd driven far enough and needed to turn around and head home again. So, he mailed the letters in Princeton.
I also realized that the reason that there was no return address on the media letters may have been because the child doing the writing wrote too large, and perhaps ruined an envelope or two before Ivins decided to just use the destination addresses on the envelopes to NBC, CBS, ABC, AMI and the New York Post.
In my Sunday comment, I also mentioned that there has been no dispute of any kind regarding my discovery that the Emerson radio/CD player in Ivins' lab was most likely a "nanny cam" TV spy camera.
And, I also mentioned once again that Anthrax Truthers do not agree with each other about who sent the anthrax letters. But, they ignore that fact in order to appear united in their belief that the FBI was wrong in naming Ivins as the anthrax mailer.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Feb. 12 - Feb. 18 Discussions
My Sunday comment on February 12 began with details about the completed first draft of my book. (The second draft probably won't be done any sooner than four months.)
I then posted a few of the 52 photographs I received from the FBI in response to a Freedom Of Information Act request I'd filed.
I commented on the photos I posted. They show how cramped and filled with equipment the lab was. And, the only window was the window in the door.
Lastly, I mentioned the discussions from last week which indicate that I'm arguing with one person (Richard Rowley) who truly believes that the person who sent the anthrax letters had Hebrew as his first language. And the other person in last week's arguments ("Anonymous") truly believes that some Muslim sent the anthrax letters. Their arguments seem almost diametrically opposed, yet they don't argue with each other, and they don't present evidence in support of their beliefs. They only argue that the FBI must be wrong - not due to any kind of criminal conspiracy - but due either to incompetence or to laziness and "group think."
A second comment posted on Sunday shows that an Emerson CD player seen in Ivins' lab is also sold as a "nanny cam" that can be used to spy on people. And Ivins was known to purchase and use such spy equipment.
I then posted a few of the 52 photographs I received from the FBI in response to a Freedom Of Information Act request I'd filed.
I commented on the photos I posted. They show how cramped and filled with equipment the lab was. And, the only window was the window in the door.
Lastly, I mentioned the discussions from last week which indicate that I'm arguing with one person (Richard Rowley) who truly believes that the person who sent the anthrax letters had Hebrew as his first language. And the other person in last week's arguments ("Anonymous") truly believes that some Muslim sent the anthrax letters. Their arguments seem almost diametrically opposed, yet they don't argue with each other, and they don't present evidence in support of their beliefs. They only argue that the FBI must be wrong - not due to any kind of criminal conspiracy - but due either to incompetence or to laziness and "group think."
A second comment posted on Sunday shows that an Emerson CD player seen in Ivins' lab is also sold as a "nanny cam" that can be used to spy on people. And Ivins was known to purchase and use such spy equipment.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Feb. 5 - Feb. 11, 2012 Discussions
The main topic of my Sunday comment this week is an examination of inconsistencies and errors in an official police report about the death of Bruce Ivins in July 2008. The intent was to show that humans make mistakes, even in critical situations. So, it can take some analysis to figure out exactly what happened.
The Washington Post "reporter" who re-hashed an error in a court document filed in the Stevens vs USA lawsuit should have realized that mistakes happen and that it DID NOT mean a change in direction for the case, nor was it any evidence of a disagreement between civil and criminal divisions in the DOJ. It was just a human error, which is totally understandable in a case as complex as the Amerithrax case.
Also, last week's news reports that, last October, a university professor in Pakistan mailed some anthrax to the Pakistani Prime Minister seems to have stirred up the Lunatic Fringe. They seem to see it as being connected to the anthrax attacks of 2001 -- until proved otherwise to their satisfaction. But, of course, it can never be proved otherwise to their satisfaction, since facts mean absolutely nothing to Anthrax Truthers and The Lunatic Fringe.
The Washington Post "reporter" who re-hashed an error in a court document filed in the Stevens vs USA lawsuit should have realized that mistakes happen and that it DID NOT mean a change in direction for the case, nor was it any evidence of a disagreement between civil and criminal divisions in the DOJ. It was just a human error, which is totally understandable in a case as complex as the Amerithrax case.
Also, last week's news reports that, last October, a university professor in Pakistan mailed some anthrax to the Pakistani Prime Minister seems to have stirred up the Lunatic Fringe. They seem to see it as being connected to the anthrax attacks of 2001 -- until proved otherwise to their satisfaction. But, of course, it can never be proved otherwise to their satisfaction, since facts mean absolutely nothing to Anthrax Truthers and The Lunatic Fringe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)