Posted on 04/13/2008 8:20:52 AM PDT by ZacandPook
The media spores contained significantly more silica than the senate spores. Naturally you interpret this finding of a silica additive to mean “contamination” by silicon and oxygen. This is almost akin to saying that a harmless powder was sent that was accidently contaminated with anthrax spores.
It’s called spin.
The facts, however, say otherwise.
It’s always a sure sign that a spinmeister is at work when he is forced to flat out lie about the facts. Such as Meselson does when he claims to C&E News that AFIP released a spectrum showing “only a silicon peak” - when the FACTS show that the spectrum they released was a reference sample of silica.
Preston’s book is a book by an outsider.
My information is from the insider who lived it.
Ed, I’m just reporting what the SEMs and EDX showed. That’s just a factual matter.
Almost nothing about the anthrax attacks is remotely indicative of the modus operandi of a serial killer. If he were, we almost certainly would have seen more anthrax letters by now, assuming that he is in fact still alive and on the loose.
My guess is that Preston may think he's somewhat similar to Theodore "The Unabomber" Kaczynski, but even the frequent description of Kaczynski as a "serial killer" is debateable. I always thought of him as more of an anarcho-terrorist than a true serial killer myself.
That's the way it should be with lab contamination.
1. The particles of glass (or silica or polymerized glass) are too small to be seen with a TEM. That means the particles could be anywhere from a single molecule on up to hundreds of molecules.
2. The particles are floating around in the nutrients. They either came off the glass walls of the fermenter or they came in the nutrients.
3. A bacterium has no mouth. It absorbs food through its skin (outer membrane).
4. Just like you and I, a bacterium has some ability to know what food it can digest and what it cannot.
5. Glass is not food for a Bacillus anthracis bacterium.
6. The larger particles of glass will not pass through the membrane. But smaller ones can -- if they are small enough.
7. Therefore, there would be a LOT MORE glass particles on the outside of a bacterium than gets inside the bacterium.
8. When a bacterium is about to die and begins to form a spore, just some of the tiny particles that managed to get INSIDE the bacterium will become part of the spore.
9. The "crude powder" in the media letters would have MUCH more glass on the surface of the dead bacteria because of all the glass particles that were too big to be absorbed and got stuck to the outer surfaces.
10. The spore that forms inside the bacterium will have only the smaller particles of glass that got through the mother germ's membrane.
Purification gets rid of all those dead mother germs, dead bactria and all the silica stuck to them. Therefore, it seems perfectly logical that the media powder would show many times as much glass as the purified spores.
I don't know what kind of fantasy you have dreamed up to explain things. Why don't you enlighten us by telling us how many people were involved in the massive conspiracy required to make your fantasy a reality?
Your information is nearly worthless because it's all filtered through your beliefs.
You began with a fantasy that the "crude powder" in the media letters was mostly silica, and for some fantasy reason they REMOVED the silica to create the Senate powder.
Who knows what you now believe? We certainly don't know what the AFIP report actually said.
Where did I say that the “crude powder” in the media letters was mostly silica?
What I said is above. There is no reason to put different words in my mouth.
I have no problem not passing on information to you — what critical sources have to say. I thought you appreciated it.
My friend went with the “911 imam” Aulaqi on Hajj in Spring 2001. The group hired Aulaqi to be one of the imams who guided the group. He and the other three imams were very intolerant of non-Muslims — especially Jews. My friends says one of the other imams was the imam who ran “Holy Land Foundation.” He admitted in fundraising appeals in Saudi that his group was giving aid to families of suicide bombers.
The imams — including Aulaqi — took the group to the plant in Medina where the Quran is printed. Women were not allowed to go beyond the waiting room. The men were given an audience with the head of the printing plant — who urged need for a “holy war” against “the Jews.”
My friend got to talk to Aulaqi in great detail since he and Aulaqi were roommates for the hajj (they shared the same room — double occupancy).
My friend passes on these stories only to show that Aulaqi was deep into hard-core political islam. He was not a cleric who just said prayers and counseled people as some of his supporters have suggested. Don’t be fooled by the moderate talk intended for public consumption — whether by Anwar or by Ali.
My friend was describing going through the airport — it was very important that all the books be orthodoxy. He could have had all manner of bad things in his suitcase — it was having only the right books that was important. He noted that Aulaqi would wear his heavy traditional Yemen robes. (Sa’naa is high up and gets cool at night). In Saudi Arabia, in contrast, they wear a thin white robe and it is always hot in the desert.
Sami al-Hussayen’s uncle was head of the mosques at Mecca at Medina. His uncle stayed in the same hotel as two key hijackers. When the FBI questioned him, he feigned a seizure. Even though the doctors said nothing was wrong with him, he was allowed to return home. In his pre-911 visit, he visited both Anwar and Ali.
Although Anwar Aulaqi preferred living in the US, he comes from a well-to-do, well-established family in Yemen. The FBI questioned hm repeatedly about anthrax and other matters over his 18 month detention. He is staying put in Yemen, he says, given the possibility that the US might want to bring charges on unspecified matters.
Anarcho-terrorist is a good description. I think of Kaczynski as a nordicist anarchist but anarcho-terrorist is better yet. If you look at paras. 222, 227 and 229 of the manifesto he expressly asks the nazis to join with him.
In the 1970s William Pierce of the National Alliance (the propagandist and former right-hand man for American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell) railed against the advance of technology just like Kacyznski did.
Ted’s brother David lived in a hole in Texas for much of the period 1983-1989. In 1985, David gave his friend Joe LaFollette an idea for a book called TECHNOPHOBIA on a camping trip. It’s on file at the Library of Congress. Joe told me he whipped it off in a month at a computer lab. It’s about a guy who wakes up bearded and unkempt having dreamt he killed a bunch of people. The fellow in the book used a knife. David came here once to speak about the death penalty. I wanted to ask him if he knew what Ted was doing in the garage where they lived in 1978 and 1979.
TrebleRebel, you know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America’s Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn’t want to go to war, the three most powerful men in America are named “Bush”, “Dick”, and “Colon,” and the guy who is 95% certain a First Grader wrote the anthrax letters as part of a conspiracy thinks he’s the voice of reason.
Professor Meselson was shown photos showing what has been called “fried egg goop” (or whatever the phrasing) from Preston’s book.
I know your lay person’s theory.
Did you discuss with Professor Meselson what he thought of those photos he was shown? What did he think it was? Did he originate your “to err is human” theory? Does he support it? Did you discuss it? Thanks. I’ve never seen Professor M. acknowledge he was shown those oozing “fried egg” images or discuss them. I’m curious as to his view.
I haven't discussed anything with Professor Meselson in a long time. Most of our conversations took place in late 2002 and early 2003. If he was shown pictures of the "goop" oozing out of the spores in the TEM, he never mentioned it to me -- or to anyone, as far as I know.
Did he originate your “to err is human” theory? Does he support it? Did you discuss it?
My "to err is human" analysis of the facts is my own. Professor Meselson had nothing to do with it. I have no idea what he thinks of it. We never discussed it.
I do appreciate it. It's just sometimes very frustrating to have to figure out what the facts are after you and TrebelRebel have twisted and distorted them to fit your beliefs. It would be much easier to just see what the actual information is.
But I'll analyze information whatever way it comes.
You write:
“If he was shown pictures of the “goop” oozing out of the spores in the TEM, he never mentioned it to me — or to anyone, as far as I know.”
Given he was in fact shown the images, and has chosen not to ever mention it — while emphasizing that the SEMS he saw had no silica he could see, I find that interesting and would recommend that someone ask him to see if he, as an expert, shares your view. While he has not seen all of AFIP’s data, others have.
I agree that it is very, very interesting that he chose to emphasize, over and over again, that he was shown pictures of spores by the FBI that appeared to contain no additives. And yet he failed to mention that he was also shown the pictures of the “fried egg goop” spores.
This reminds me of his spin over the AFIP data - spinning to C&E News that AFIP released a spectrum showing only a silicon peak - when the FACTS are that the ONLY spectrum AFIP released was the reference spectrum of silica they used to prove that it really was silica in the Daschle spores.
Give it a try. It seems to be something of interest only to you.
As I understand it, in early 2002, Professor Meselson, Ken Alibek and a few others were shown between 5 and 8 micrographs of the Daschle anthrax because the FBI was looking for some explanation for why silicon and oxygen would be detected when there were no silica particles visible under an SEM. (I suppose it's possible that some of these photos may have been the photos of spores oozing "goop," and they may have been asked about them, too. The subject was never mentioned, possibly because it would be obvious that the "goop" came from the chemicals used to kill the spores. Also, possibly, because it showed a simple mistake that no one needed to tell the public about.)
After that event, Professor Meselson recalled reading something about silicon being detected in spores, and he found two articles from 1980 which explained it as most likely being the result of lab contamination.
Eight or more months later, The Washington Post published a screwball article titled "FBI's Theory On Anthrax is Doubted" which suggested that there was fumed silica in the Daschle anthrax.
In their letter to the editor of the Washington Post, Meselson and Alibek wrote:
The article quoted unnamed sources as saying that the spores had been formulated with a product called fumed silica, which, under an electron microscope, "would look like cotton balls strung together into strands that branch out in every direction."
Both of us have examined electron micrographs of the material in the anthrax letter sent to Sen. Tom Daschle, but we saw no evidence of such balls or strands.
So, Meselson and Alibek only said they saw no signs of fumed silica. They said nothing about any "goop." The "goop" would not be relative to the subject of the letter.
Hmm. Right. There were also a lot of messages that March. And that was when Prof. Meselson sent me the copies of the 1980 reports. Interesting. I thought those discussions were a lot earlier. Thanks for reminding me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.