Letters to the Editor
thelastnamechosen
Published Letters: 283
-
Glenn
[Read the article: The unresolved story of ABC News' false Saddam-anthrax reports]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't believe there was any bentonite and I don't believe Iraq was responsible for the anthrax attacks.
Again, the point of my post is that there was NO BENTONITE -- I really don't care in the slightest for purposes of this postif there was silica (since, as even Ross admitted, silica is used by a whole slew of countries besides Iraq in anthrax).
You are relying on Beecher's anonymous sources that say there were NO ADDITIVES PERIOD to prove there was no bentonite. Beecher is directly contradicted by this:
http://www.afip.org/images/public/nl081002.pdf
“Ft Detrick sought our assistance to determine the specific components of the anthrax found in the Daschle letter,” said Florabel G. Mullick, MD, ScD, SES, AFIP Principal Deputy Director and department chair. AFIP experts utilized an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (an instrument used to detect the presence of otherwise-unseen chemicals through characteristic wavelengths of X-ray light) to confirm the previously unidentifiable substance as silica. “This was a key component,” Mullick said. “Silica prevents the anthrax from aggregating, making it easier to aerosolize. Significantly, we noted the absence of aluminum with the silica. This combination had previously been found in anthrax produced by Iraq.”
A named source who has done actual scientific testing on the anthrax in question.
And my sources for the lack of bentonite are NOT unnamed - I cite Beecher, the NYT, Lake, his sources, Gray, THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION in both public and private denials, among others. Beecher has first-hand knowledge of the investigation -- he's a scientists in the FBI's lab at Quantico.
They are unnamed sources. If Beecher and the NYT are named sources then Ross and ABC are named sources. Laundering an unnamed source though a named reporter does not create a named source. That should be obvious.
Beecher - Anonymous sources contradicted by Mullick
NYT - Same as above
Lake & his sources - still waiting for a cite
Gray - ????
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION - cite please
Repeating from a previous post-If Beecher is at the center of the anthrax investigation, I am not sure why he is relying on an article written by an investigative journalist quoting unnamed sources.
My argument is that there was NO BENTONITE -- and all credible sources say that. Are you aware of any which claim otherwise?
There is so far no evidence of bentonite, except unnamed sources. While we can infer there was no bentonite, I have yet to see any science that makes that claim. Would I be surprised if there was no bentonite? No.
What do you mean by "unsourced" here? "Unsourced" means the absence of a source. How is Beecher not a source? How is Lake's comprehensive analysis of the pubicly available information not a source? Those ARE sources. You may not like the sources - you may think they are not dispositive - but they are sources.
Maybe I misunderstand your criticism of anonymous sources and of journalistic sourcing in general. If Beecher and Lake are sources for no bentonite then surely Ledeen is a source for WMDs in Iraq.
You think he's talking about the grade of anthrax here without having any idea what the tests revealed? He's just making it up?
Making what up? What is he supposed to be saying here? That not "weapons grade" means no additives? If so, that is a pretty big leap. Are you saying that Patrick did any actual testing or is basing his opinion on any actual testing?
Every source -- named source, including with first-hand knowledge - say there is no bentonite.
If Beecher is your source with first hand knowledge, his statement "Individuals familiar with the compositions of the powders in the letters..." and then footnoting Matsumoto is a strange way to say first hand knowledge.
Damn, you are almost as stubborn as I am.
I have an idea, why don't you get someone who has done actual testing to speak on the record and say there is no bentonite instead of arguing with me.
-
BAM!!!
[Read the article: The unresolved story of ABC News' false Saddam-anthrax reports]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ari is the source to use. No anonymous sources, straight from the White House spokesperson's mouth. It even has a built in critique of unnamed sourcing. Much better than Beecher. Makes your post and subsequent pressure on ABC for a correction bulletproof.
I wish the process to get here wasn't akin to pulling teeth but I guess it is better than Marathon Man.
Believe it or not Glenn, I think this a very important article you have written and I just wanted it to be as strong as it could be. A little less defensiveness and I might have been the one to do your leg work for you:) Oh well...Back to lurk mode.