Connecting The Dots In Anthrax Coverage

What The Sun, The Times and The Washington Post Are Really Saying

"Genetic fingerprinting studies indicate that the anthrax spores mailed to Capitol Hill are identical to stocks of the deadly bacteria maintained by the U.S. Army since 1980, according to scientists familiar with the most recent tests" is the lead in an article by Rick Weiss and Susan Schmidt on page A1 (below the fold, right side of the bottom of the page) of The Washinngton Post for December 16, 2001 titled "Capitol Hill Anthrax Matches Army's Stocks" and subtitled "5 Labs Can Trace Spores to Ft. Detrick." (About Sept. 15, Schmidt was fooled (lied to/deliberately lied to her readers) in a manner designed to make either the FBI or CIA look less incompetent than they actually were.

This all started on Wednesday, December 12, 2001, in The Baltimore Sun. Scott Shane's article apparently first published late 12/11 in papers dated 12/12. Looks like they didn't even bother to round up the usual suspects.

On Thursday, December 13, The New York Times had the following by William J. Broad and Judith Miller (without attribution to The Sun) on the front page upper left headed: "U.S. Recently Produced Anthrax In a Highly Lethal Powder Form" and subheaded: "Army Says Strain Isn't the One Tied to 5 Deaths." It was made to look like a Times exclusive. Note that if The Post 12/16 article's lead is correct, The Times subhead on 12/13 is incorrect.

Also on Thursday, December 13, The Washington Post appeared with a much more informative article (attributing the story to the Sun in paragraph 7) (which probably sets a record for height of attribution in a Post article and must have required major drinking of pride by the entire editorial board) by Rick Weiss and Jody Warrick on page A16 titled "Army Working on Weapons Grade Anthrax" subtitled "Utah Facility Quietly Developed Formulation; Spores Sent Back and Forth to Md." Note in particular, really deep in the article, how Ft. Detrick without the ability to manufacture the stuff managed to more than double the amount they were sent by Dugway in June, 2001 and was able to sextuple the amount it was sent by Dugway in 2000.

Friday, Dec. 14, William Broad re-appeared in The NYT (without Miller) on page B6 (The Times has had a special B section devoted to the aftermath of 9/11 since a few days after the events) with "F.B.I. Queries Expert Who Sees Federal Lab Tie in Anthrax Cases." Note the variance between the answer the bureau wanted and tried repeatedly (using bureau SOP) to get and the one they got from the expert and the implications thereof.

Friday, Dec. 14 Rick Weiss was back in The Wash Post on page A18 with "Army's Anthrax Material Surprises Some Experts." The possibility is raised that Dugway was doing the investigating without telling the bureau they made the stuff. Plus ca change . . .

The last sentence in the column's reportage obviously writes itself: "Given that the anthrax murders are unsolved, the FBI continues to seek at least one undisclosed person in an undisclosed location."