Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RocketMan who wrote (6997)	10/23/2001 8:03:01 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Based on what I am reading in the Washington Post, what was said was that the letter in question was extremely well-sealed, and the chance of catching anthrax was considered remote. washingtonpost.com washingtonpost.com There is no question that the decisions made were based on mistaken assumptions. As for your insistence that less care was taken because the facility was not in Georgetown, let's agree to disagree on that one. I think more care would have been taken if the incident had happened at the Merrifield or Dulles facilities because the Fairfax authorities are more proactive, and the DC authorities are always playing catch-up. Anyway, it's 20-20 hindsight, IMO. Based on what I know of DC lawyers, there are already plaintiff attorneys knocking on doors and drafting papers.