[Just sayin]

And you don't find it "surprising" that FIVE AND A HALF YEARS LATER and the authorities have found NO evidence that al Qaeda was behind the anthrax attacks. In fact, ALL the evidence seems to dispute such a belief.

Is this to say you have reviewed ALL the evidence that exists? Pretty bold claim to make isn't it? I am not trying to be combative with you but it seems like you are stretching a bit in that statement. It portrays the idea that we have seen publicly everything that has been collected.

I am Just sayin I don't accept that premise.

[EdLake]

Is this to say you have reviewed ALL the evidence that exists? Pretty bold claim to make isn't it?

Yes, in my haste to respond to these discussions in a timely manner I sometimes I do not properly qualify what I write.

I wrote "the authorities have found NO evidence that al Qaeda was behind the anthrax attacks.". I should have written, "AS FAR AS I KNOW AFTER COLLECTING ALL THE INFORMATION I COULD FIND OVER A PERIOD OF FIVE AND A HALF YEARS, the authorities have found NO evidence that al Qaeda was behind the anthrax attacks."

I wrote "In fact, ALL the evidence seems to dispute such a belief." I should have written, "In fact, AS FAR AS I KNOW AFTER COLLECTING ALL THE INFORMATION I COULD FIND OVER A PERIOD OF FIVE AND A HALF YEARS, ALL the evidence seems to dispute such a belief.

Is that better?

Ed at www.anthraxinvestigation.com