Talk:2001 anthrax attacks

"Bioterrorism" lable: is this accurate?

Heading box lable says: "Attack type: bioterrorism". Can we really say this? Although the definition of terrorism is somewhat inconclusive, its generally accepted that it is politically/ideologically motivated. There is zero evidence of that here, the FBI listed financial benefit as a possible motive which makes it firmly criminal. Likewise, throughout the article all quotes from the FBI call it a crime. If you accept the FBI conclusions then it is more akin to most school shootings: an awful crime but not terrorist due to the lack of political motivation. Will change this unless someone objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben8142 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The bioterrorists are the USA itself since their government developed the weapon in the first place. 2800:150:107:330:2DC1:B551:E22D:809A (talk) 00:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Footnote

Why is it written [13]:8 footnote in the last paragraph of the LEDE? I checked the 8th footnote of the 13th cited link but I couldn't find anything relevant. Usually I thought Wikipedia kept a footnote at the end of the page, I couldn't find that either--LostCitrationHunter (talk) 10:05, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Al-Qaeda

Its written "Al-Qaeda" as accused in the infobox, but in the article it later mentions that there was no proof that a biochemical weapon could be developed in a cave... so should or should it not be mentioned in the infobox? like "Steven Hatfill (exonerated)"--LostCitrationHunter (talk) 10:07, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

RMR-1029 flask

I think there’s an issue with the RMR-1029 flask picture, it is just a link. I think it was supposed to be a picture box…?

Thanks, Dwightol102 (talk) 04:21, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Notes about it

The idea of Bruce Ivins doing it is probably not as likely as people think. He was mentally ill, however it turns out USAMRID wasn’t properly bio contained, he cleaned up an anthrax leek from one of his underlings. So if he did it, people at USAMRID would have been sick. It likely required a tool he didn’t have access to. I personally am not convinced.

Also we should mention that no one was caught or prosecuted.

Even his alleged confession letter says he feels responsible for the loose samples, because he feels like his underlings lost a sample. 2600:1012:B11F:BE1D:4C2E:51BD:FE7:A767 (talk) 22:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

The man worked developing a bioweapon for the US. He was not a good man, and probably a little crazy from the start.

Morally speaking, it doesn't make a difference if it's used to kill foreigner or local civilians. 2800:150:107:330:2DC1:B551:E22D:809A (talk) 00:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

was the attack done by the Houthi movement?

on both of the notes, the words "DEATH TO AMERICA, DEATH TO ISRAEL, ALLAH IS GREAT" which is eerily similar to the first three sentences on the flag of the Houthi movement, which says "god is the greatest, death to America, death to Israel." You see what I'm saying here? Bonbontofu (talk) 03:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

You really think this has to do with Houtis?

Simply remember that the US accused two of their own employees in the Biodefense industry. Ivins was also partly responsible for the Anthrax Immunization that was made for the Gulf War. The same one that causes Gulf War Syndrome. Try FB/AmerithraxLettersDecoded for information behind the ciphers found in the letters, which detail the patterns of previous operations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:B078:EB15:3143:3CB:EED1:5C90 (talk) 00:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)