Expert sources from my hazmat training assert:
(1) Anthrax previously produced by lunatic fringe groups never met weaponized grade of agent. Much like comparing Icarus wings against the space shuttle for aviation.
(2) The 2001 subject agent is a weaponized grade of anthrax. Very few countries in the world are capable of producing this grade of agent.
(3) While no "proof," many skeptics can not dismiss the possibility the subject agent was smuggled into the USA via many means, including diplomatic pouch.
My personal spin. Use the pedophile wannabe Ritter theorem:
Ask Scotty Ritter if Iraq was responsible. If slimy Scotty claims Iraq was not responsible, Iraq most certainly was responsilbe.
They turned to the hot topic of anthrax. The powder in the letter mailed to Senator Daschle's office had been found to be potent, prompting officials to suggest its source was likely an expert capable of producing the bacteria in large amounts. Tenet said, "I think it's AQ" meaning al Qaeda. "I think there's a state sponsor involved. It's too well thought out, the powder's too well refined. It might be Iraq, it might be Russia, it might be a renegade scientist," perhaps from Iraq or Russia. Scooter Libby, Cheney's chief of staff, said he also thought the anthrax attacks were state sponsored. "We've got to be careful on what we say." It was important not to lay it on anyone now. "If we say it's al Qaeda, a state sponsor may feel safe and then hit us thinking they will have a bye because we'll blame it on al Qaeda."Funnily enough, ten days after this NSC meeting, Bob Woodward was peddling the "rightwing extremist" line in the Washington Post: FBI and CIA Suspect Domestic Extremists: Officials Doubt Any Links to Bin Laden."I'm not going to talk about a state sponsor," Tenet assured them.
"It's good that we don't," said Cheney, "because we're not ready to do anything about it."
Hmm. Odd, that. The administration concludes that the anthrax came from al-Qaeda, probably supplied by a state sponsor, but that it is inappropriate to inform the public of that conclusion. Ten days later, Bob Woodward is peddling the right-wing militia story to the public. What could this possibly mean? What could we possibly conclude from this?