"The strongest, in my opinion, was the allegation that Ivins supplied a false or tainted sample in 2002 when one was requested from RMR-1029 - such deceitfulness would at a minimum suggest Ivins had something to hide."

I believe the FBI is now stating that they destroyed this evidence?

Your threads and those of a few other netroots are the only place for critical information on this topic.

Is it assumed that the doctor loaded envelops in his lab for simple ease of vial access and evidence containment reasons - why dirty a second site that could turn up later.

If so how did he get loaded envelops out the door? Did he place them in a bag, briefcase, box or cooler – or simply walk out with porous letters hand and throw them on the seat of his car for the mad capped ride to NJ?

Did he wear gloves when putting the letters in the mailbox, or just scrub up with Ivory prior to snuggling into bed with the ms’s upon his return? And if gloves, where’d he toss ‘em, was there a garbage can close to the mail box and was it (they) swabbed?

Mr Greenwald and fellow money bombers,

Having followed the FISA compromise exposé on Salon, I was happy when a friend in the DC area sent me a Washington Post advert I believe was sponsored by the strange bedfellow / money bomb. Tentatively knowing about my interest in the matter, my contact passed along the well-presented information without prompting, signaling to me that its message registered with a consumer typically saturated with political reporting.

Its subsequent posting on the refrigerator door in anywhere America also tickled the natural ambivalence of a public neutered by corporate ‘local’ press and the routines of provincialism.

Lacking further education on the issues both resident locations still failed to grasp the full import of the issue, yet I do believe that the effort provided them a fair warning.

Thanks to the person linking this site.

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bioter/asolutionanthraxmys.html

"That would explain how spores could escape into mail-processing facilities, cross-contaminating other letters and affecting workers, even though the Daschle letter, and a recently discovered one addressed to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), reportedly were sealed with tape.

Experts earlier had said it would be possible for spores to puff out of the unglued openings at the ends of an envelope flap. But several had questioned how readily spores could escape from a well-sealed envelope.

E.J. Rice, vice president for development at the Institute of Paper Science and Technology in Atlanta, said this week that tests sponsored by the institute suggest there may be thousands of microscopic tunnels infiltrating the paper of a typical envelope.

"We are of the opinion now that it [anthrax powder] is able to come through" the paper, Rice said.

David Rothbard, an associate scientist at the institute, said, "It is not unusual to find pore connections on the order of five microns or larger" in envelope paper.

Such connections, under the right conditions, would provide passageways for the escape of the 1.5- to 3-micron particles found in samples of the anthrax powder mailed to Daschle.

Particles in the 1- to 5-micron range can be inhaled readily and can cause the potentially lethal inhalation form of anthrax. Such particles, much smaller than a dust mote, can float in the air like a gas once released, experts say. (A human hair is about 100 microns in diameter.)

The Leahy letter, discovered Nov. 16 in a barrel of unopened congressional mail, has been described by an Army scientist as leaking anthrax spores "like a sieve." After careful preparations, investigators at the Army's Fort Detrick biodefense facility in Maryland were planning to open the letter by today and begin a physical and chemical examination of its contents......."

The letter loading place, transport to car, car transport, and mail box insertion point all present good places for evidence collection. Was his car clean? Was his laundry basket?

The epidemiology of the 2001 letter routings suggests to some two strains of anthrax. (See flow chart link my sig.)

Earlier (news corporations batch mailing) – (5) letters resulted in: 2 inhalation cases (1 death) from a single letter, and 9 skin contacts (cutaneous survivors)

Later (Senate batch mailing) – (2) letters resulted in: 9 inhalation cases (4 deaths/ 5 sickened), and 2 cutaneous survivors

Apparent anomalies:

First reported (Florida case) resulted in two inhalation cases.

- Was this batch of letters loaded with refined anthrax and if so why so many cutaneous cases?

The second Senate attack batch seemed scewed to a more refined spore and air delivery method - relative to the first batch.

- Was the second batch more refined?

- and why are 1 cutaneous survivor and 2 inhaled DEATHS from this group still unresolved as to evidentiary linkage of spore delivery. The victims did not receive death letters nor work at mail centers or government offices. Anonymous folks cross contaminated.

Does any of this jibe with the allowable MO now outlined for the lone killer?

I thought the same after reading the TIME rehash (in Glenn's updates). There is no need for FAKE anthrax, as the government controls all the real anthrax from beginning to end.

Even if the victims of this case where killed by anthrax is there hard independent evidence that their contamination occurred on the job. Could it have happened at another time – such as when they were under quarantine?

Sure it’s preposterous! But we must eliminate the possible and what remains no matter how improbable is the truth.

The problem is most don’t have the time or resources to do so.