It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anthrax Suspect Claimed He Knew Who Killer Was, E-mail Reveals--MUST READ!!!!!

page: 2
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
If he was smart enough to write that letter you would think he'd be smart enough to contact the media and share the information with them, he should have set up an interview, etc. It is difficult to "off" someone when they release the information you don't want out, then it would be pretty obvious that he was killed if he suddenly wound up dead.

[edit on 26-9-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]




posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 08:10 AM
link   
I don't think this is proof of a conspiracy. I think this is just further proof that this man was in fact responsible for the anthrax attacks!

Who would send themselves that kind of e-mail? It makes no sense. A person would only e-mail themselves to remind them of something. This is clearly a stunt pulled by the perpetrator because he knew that they were closing in on him. He foolishly thought that by e-mailing himself such a statement, that it would cast doubt on his guilt if he ever was to go to trial.

Furthermore, he says that he knows who is responsible for the attacks, yet, he closes the e-mail by saying that he still has a month or so worth of work left to do on the investigation. That makes no sense. Either you know who was responsible, or you don't.

Until I see convincing evidence proving otherwise, this man is guilty. And this joke of an e-mail does more to convince me of his guilt than any mysterious conspiracy. If he truly was innocent, and really knew who did it, then he would have told everyone he knew and he would have shouted it from the rooftops knowing that they wouldn't be able to "suicide" him if he came forward first.

Some of you guys look for a conspiracy in everything, and you grasp onto anything that you can construe as evidence supporting it. I hate to break it to you, but not everything is a conspiracy. This guy was clearly a mental case and just the kind of individual who would carry out those cowardly attacks.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Rasputin13
 


I would venture to say 'sounding crazy' was exactly what the people responsible had in mind. A very simple way to discredit someone.

It is just as possible he wrote this on purpose for 'proof' as others in the thread have pointed out. The whole situation is just to convenient.

Either way I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be 'Innocent until PROVEN guilty'.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Doesn't the fact that he emailed this to himself bring his sanity into question just a bit? I mean, I've emailed information or mental notes to myself from one account to another one for later use, but never have I written myself an exuberant letter like this.


I don't know if this is the case here, but when I'm out of town, I often email myself from my yaho email to my home email. I just don't like accessing my private email on some hotels wireless network.

Or, maybe this guy used his email program like a digital diary.

(Just some thoughts on what his reasoning could be to email himself.)



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Isn't it also possible that he was somewhat involved within a small group in the military. It seems like he was a man realizing that he was being framed for the whole thing when he only played a small part. Let us remember that this was all going down when they were pushing the congress and senate to sign the patriot act and the anthrax was sent to the capital. Now they traced it to an army germ warfare lab. If you put two and two together it makes sense.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Doesn't the fact that he emailed this to himself bring his sanity into question just a bit? I mean, I've emailed information or mental notes to myself from one account to another one for later use, but never have I written myself an exuberant letter like this.


That, and this



Authorities said Ivins used another Internet identity, "bruceivi," to post violent messages on YouTube about Kathryn Price, an actress who appeared on the reality television show "The Mole."


But who knows if it's true.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Or it could just be a situation where he wanted to protect the privacy of the list. I often email myself stuff and then BCC a whole group of other people. That way I protect the privacy of those I'm communicating with.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Even though the OP title wasn't technically misleading... i's a bit dissapointing.

Recently, I've seen things like:

Antichrist Revealed- well, no... he's not

Incontravertable proof of Jesus... well, no.

And so on...

I'm not sure I understand why would anyone post, without a name ?

But, there's an interesting aspect ( even without decent info ) : if Ivins sent this email- then it's practically a confession, as the email seems designed to be read by others...
If it's inserted into his email then the plot thickens...



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by T0by
 


Yes, who knows if it's true ?

Any one of us can be ' audiotaped ' threatening to do something awful.

We can be ' videotaped ' doing something awful.

Plenty of evidence can be found to further implicate us...

Emails and phone calls from our criminal freinds.

Witnesses come forward...

And, in the meantime: we have done absolutely nothing.

Yes, who knows if it's true... he seemed like such a nice neighbor.

Pretty scary.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Doesn't the fact that he emailed this to himself bring his sanity into question just a bit? I mean, I've emailed information or mental notes to myself from one account to another one for later use, but never have I written myself an exuberant letter like this.


I'd like to respond to this by saying that writing a letter to ones self is an old and proven way to document things. The act went by several names “Poor man’s Patent”, “Secret Notary”, “Postal Notary”, etc. People have done this long before e-mail, but electronic mail has now made this practice more common place and expanded the capabilities.

The act has resurfaced time and time again throughout history when mistrust in the system was prevalent. It was most commonly used in conjunction with the patent application process and in some cases still is to this day. It has been suggested that some of the patent clerks may have stolen ideas from those who simply did not know how to properly file a patent. Research famous inventors who worked at patent offices and you’ll get the idea.

It does not mean he was crazy, on the contrary, he was scared and knew he was being watched. Just because you’re paranoid, doesn’t mean you’re wrong.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Just one other question I have.

If a guy is working in an anthrax lab and has access to it how could he be so stupid as to do that?

Everyone knows when you email yourself an email it says in the From box that it's from the person mailing it.

I would really be interested in seeing the dbx file in his email assuming they are using microsoft software which I'm pretty sure they were. Chances are they had the update patch to it so then it wouldn't do me any good. But then again the govt use to always be slow on updating software.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
reply to post by mystiq
 


wouldn't he have been better served sending the email to himself AND his attorney, his friends, family, the newspapers and anyone else who'd listen?



Has it actually been determined that he didn't send copies of that e-mail to others? There are many ways to do this as you suggest without leaving a trail to those people, while still leaving a documented trail back to the original. Therefore it would be up to the discretion of those recipients to come forward. But if he was innocent and was killed as suggested, I would think that his death might be an even greater intimidation to those recipients to not come forward for fear of a similar consequence.

Keeping in mind that he knew he was being monitored. He might of thought it would be a better way to build documentation of the fact, if he left no trail to any other recipients that could be just as easily deleted or threatened.

Number one rule of a conspiracy, when you commit, you commit 100%.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by eaganthorn
The act has resurfaced time and time again throughout history when mistrust in the system was prevalent. It was most commonly used in conjunction with the patent application process and in some cases still is to this day. It has been suggested that some of the patent clerks may have stolen ideas from those who simply did not know how to properly file a patent. Research famous inventors who worked at patent offices and you’ll get the idea.


This is a sensible way to establish a timeline, and that you had knowledge of something before others. But it requires including in the letter or email some details that prove what you have knowledge of.

If I send myself a email today that says "Invented personal flying machine. Must patent when I get around to it." And then next year someone else patents a personal flying machine, the email isn't going to do me much good unless it includes the design.

Just writing to yourself, or to yourself and a blind cc list, "I know who did it, I should be a sleuth" is utterly worthless as proof that you have any evidence whatsoever. It is more suggestive (in my opinion) of a desperation to try and create some sort of possible defense for when they get you.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


wow!

i knew it

i knew the whole deal with him that was done up for the mainstream media was a scam..

once you know 9/11 was an inside job you can clearly see this anthrax deal was too.



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by americandingbat
If I send myself a email today that says "Invented personal flying machine. Must patent when I get around to it." And then next year someone else patents a personal flying machine, the email isn't going to do me much good unless it includes the design.


True, for the sake of a patent you would need to send the actual plans through to have them documented for a timeline or at least enough of the plans to distinguish them as yours.


Originally posted by americandingbat
Just writing to yourself, or to yourself and a blind cc list, "I know who did it, I should be a sleuth" is utterly worthless as proof that you have any evidence whatsoever. It is more suggestive (in my opinion) of a desperation to try and create some sort of possible defense for when they get you.


I must admit that you have a sound point for an argument, but allow me to insert this idea, do we know that there were no other e-mails sent or that the e-mail in question was not edited and when I ask this, let me inform you that it is very easy to delete characters from an email that has been published and delivered. Are we so certain that the original e-mail didn’t say "I know who did it, it was John Doe, I should be a sleuth"? And the John Doe portion simply deleted?

That being said, there would be a way to verify if it was edited in this way by checking the character count of all the systems involved, provided the information was captured. On the PC where the e-mail originated, in the software that manages the email there would be a character count as well as a content size prior to sending and is in at least two formats, this would need to match with the information of the carrier and the recipient’s header info. While it is easy to edit a sent e-mail by deleting some info, it is much harder to hack through the carrier info, the DOS text info and header info and have them all balance out perfectly. But I doubt if that information was captured as no court knows to require it as yet, digital and electronic publishing is still in its infancy.



posted on Sep, 28 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skelkie3
reply to post by T0by
 


Yes, who knows if it's true ?

Any one of us can be ' audiotaped ' threatening to do something awful.

We can be ' videotaped ' doing something awful.

Plenty of evidence can be found to further implicate us...

Emails and phone calls from our criminal freinds.

Witnesses come forward...

And, in the meantime: we have done absolutely nothing.

Yes, who knows if it's true... he seemed like such a nice neighbor.

Pretty scary.


Yeah in situations such as these I just take in the general jist of the story, the basics, and disregard any of the added slander.
I just know this guy was accused of sending anthrax letters.
He says he didn't. Then he says he was close to knowing who did it.
Then he died.

Those are the basics for me. I often think this way when the source is from the MSM.

If it's an ATS discussion with multiple sources and angles, then you can do some real thinking.



posted on Nov, 19 2008 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13
I don't think this is proof of a conspiracy. I think this is just further proof that this man was in fact responsible for the anthrax attacks!

Who would send themselves that kind of e-mail? It makes no sense. A person would only e-mail themselves to remind them of something. This is clearly a stunt pulled by the perpetrator because he knew that they were closing in on him. He foolishly thought that by e-mailing himself such a statement, that it would cast doubt on his guilt if he ever was to go to trial.

Furthermore, he says that he knows who is responsible for the attacks, yet, he closes the e-mail by saying that he still has a month or so worth of work left to do on the investigation. That makes no sense. Either you know who was responsible, or you don't.

Until I see convincing evidence proving otherwise, this man is guilty. And this joke of an e-mail does more to convince me of his guilt than any mysterious conspiracy. If he truly was innocent, and really knew who did it, then he would have told everyone he knew and he would have shouted it from the rooftops knowing that they wouldn't be able to "suicide" him if he came forward first.

Some of you guys look for a conspiracy in everything, and you grasp onto anything that you can construe as evidence supporting it. I hate to break it to you, but not everything is a conspiracy. This guy was clearly a mental case and just the kind of individual who would carry out those cowardly attacks.


So you are suggesting Dr. Ivins carefully prepared a way to indicate his innocence if he got caught, by emailing this to himself, and then committed suicide?

Sorry, the two actions are a bit contradictory.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join