They got it wrong the same way you got it wrong. Deliberately.
The LA Times article didn't get anything right. They indicated that my Fake Detective site is the anthrax site which is visited by the FBI, etc. On their wire-service version they even give the URL for my Fake Detective site and said that's my anthrax site.
Do you like what the LA Times said about you?
I've mentioned the Milwaukee guy as being a possible source for the anthrax, but I've said over and over that he has a PERFECT ALIBI for the time of the mailings. I do NOT believe he's the mailer.
Who is your suspect then? A person that you don't have a shred of real evidence against - just your "gut feeling"? How does that make you any different than Barbara Hatch Rosenberg? BHR suspected Hatfill on her gut feeling. How are you any different?
Who says I don't have a shred of evidence? The fact that I won't tell people who I suspect or what evidence I have is what separates me from Barbara Hatch Rosenberg. My "person of interest" has suffered no effects from the fact that I find him to be of interest. And the reason he has suffered no effects is because I keep what I know between me and the FBI. And he was of interest to the FBI long before I ever heard of him.
Ed
I know this from what I've read and from the fact that the FBI stated to Time Magazine that I've told them nothing about the case that they didn't already know.
Ed
My apologies to you and to Mr. Getman. It's sometimes hard to tell one person from another when you say exactly the same things.
This is my last message for today. Signing off.
Ed
