Slashdot Mirror
Ricin Tainted Letter Sent to Senator and Possibly the President
An anonymous reader writes "A letter addressed to Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) was tested and found to contain ricin, a highly toxic, inexpensive, and easily produced substance derived from castor beans. The letter was intercepted at the U.S. Capitol's off-site mail facility and nobody has been injured. The letter was postmarked Memphis, Tennessee, but listed no return address. Sen. Claire McCaskill told reporters that a suspect has been identified."
And, this morning, a letter addressed to the President was discovered containing a suspicious substance. Update: 04/17 16:25 GMT by U L : And the substance is ricin. Apparently, air filters at another facility have also tested positive for ricin.
Source.
I imagine he gets these every single day. It goes with the job.
Oh, wait, we have to take advantage of the bombings! We're still at war with Eastasia, remember!
No sig today...
Its someone stupid enough to think a Senator opens his own mail. (Shamelessly stolen from Twitter)
Test your net with Netalyzr
Sounding a little too much like the 9-11 era all over again (which was punctuated by the anthrax mailings) just on a much smaller scale, overall. Though I think it's likely to be totally domestic this time (including the "main event"; in this case, the Boston marathon).
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Obviously we must ban all Assault Beans. Even though castor beans aren't even really legumes at all. All that matters is that word "bean" is used, which qualifies them as Assault Beans.
Just because the Lima Bean ban back in the 1990's didn't reduce the number of assault bean attacks doesn't mean that a properly configured law - which we'll have to pass in order to find out what's really in it, of course - won't save "at least one life."
Next, we'll have to focus on deaths related to soccer and other Assault Sports. I'm looking at you, Kayaking.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I imagine he gets these every single day. It goes with the job.
Oh, wait, we have to take advantage of the bombings! We're still at war with Eastasia, remember!
This whole every-aspect-of-our-lives-must-be-in-the-context-of-1984 conspiracy stuff has really gotten out of hand ...
It's a shitty way to die.
Solving Unix problems since 1989...
So we know the perp is a million years old. Should be easy to find.
Psssst. Not only are letters outdated; so is email and so are voice phone calls. Nobody uses email and voice any more; it's all text messaging.
Nothing new; we've been anti-castor since 1960.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
He's already dead...or alive.
Simply regulating, taxing, or creating a black market that can be regulated by a 3 letter agency and give our good o'le boys much needed mercenary work and training should be sufficient.
I've been wondering about that! Man, Walter trying to kill the president?! The finale of Breaking Bad is gonna kick ass!
You're not joking, but i'm laughing anyway, since you're completely full of shit.
If someone wanted to get a piece of [tainted] paper into physical contact with the president or other important US political figure, sending it using the mail system is not the way to do it and I should think it would be more than obvious to anyone. Even without specific knowledge of the fact, various sniffing technologies can and should naturally be presumed as part of the normal mail screening and sorting processes. And even without that, isn't it hard to imagine the president actually opening his own mail?! He must receive 50lbs or mail or more a day from all the concerned citizens and crackpots out there. No way HE goes through it all personally. In which case, even without sniffing and detection technologies, it would likely get to someone else first.
So the perpetrator was either immeasurably stupid and thoughtless or this is something else.... more 'theater' for another cause supporting the loss of freedom and liberty.... or both.
Are we seriously testing all mail coming to members of Congress for poisons? How the hell is this accomplished in a reasonable amount of time, with reasonable accuracy, and how much is it costing us?
How about we build a robot that opens the mail, scans the pages into digital form, and skip all that ludicrous bullshit?
Update: 04/17 16:25 GMT by U L : And the substance is ricin. Apparently, air filters another facility have also testing positive for ricin.
What? "air filters another facility?"
You a word or two.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Enquiring minds want to know!
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
one Walter White, described as a mild-mannered, former High School Chemistry teacher.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
how the hell can you find a suspect for something like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks#Investigation
You're a moron, ricin is listed ...
And shooting people is already listed in a thousand different ways as illegal. Banning the objects to prevent what actions some few people might take is exactly what breathless politicians are screaming for. They know it's meaningless, and you know it's meaningless. Just like banning the objects from which ricin is made is meaningless.
Take your failed attempts at political satire...
The satire is all you, buddy. You just don't realize it.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Nice ridiculous argument.
There's no effective defense against stuff like this beyond what is already in place and WORKING. Detection and prevention was in place and it worked. Nothing to see here.
Clearly your statement is "anti-gun" and so I ask you. What is your idea of defense against gun violence? Please describe a scenario that might work if someone is not allowed to deter a threat with a weapon? I think we all appreciate when people have an opinion (an emotion actually in most cases) that firearms are dangerous and we don't need them. But we live in a reality where they exist regardless of their legal status. "Illegal aliens" are illegal and so is hiring them to do work. How is that helping the problem? Same thing with guns. So please describe a situation where an honest person can defend themselves without a weapon?
I think that is the saddest part of the entire thing. All the evidence for gun control is anecdotal. Some of the recent mass shootings have been tragic for those involved but they simply should not rise to the scale of a national tragedy. Statistically you are at almost not risk of being killed in a mass shooting. Infringing our second amendment rights is for not.
This latest anecdote should show that a deranged individual or group that wants to hurt a bunch of people can find a away; in an even moderately free society. Had these things been a few feet off the ground it would have been scores killed and a few just injured rather than the other way around.
The issue we should be focusing on is why are people choosing to become mass murders not how. How isn't the issue you can never address all the hows. Dealing only with the how won't make people safer and it will limit freedoms; dealing with why might actually make people safer and does not necessarily mean limiting freedoms.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Are pressure cookers used in the production of ricin from castor beans? Because when pressure cookers are outlawed, only outlaws will pressure cook!
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
And shooting people is already listed in a thousand different ways as illegal. Banning the objects to prevent what actions some few people might take is exactly what breathless politicians are screaming for. They know it's meaningless, and you know it's meaningless. Just like banning the objects from which ricin is made is meaningless.
You really are stupid, you know that? We're not proposing a ban on steel, we're proposing a ban on the ultimate object that makes pulling a trigger the difference between life and death. Just like castor beans aren't illegal to walk around with sacks of but it is illegal to walk around with sacks of ricin because it is the final product that allows that person to cause death quickly and without much effort.
Are you saying that ricin, a schedule 1 substance, should be sold to whoever wants it because the act of using it to kill people is already illegal?
The fact that I have to explain this to you really illustrates the frustration of this whole gun control debate. I bet the whole concept of "weaponized" is lost on you when we're talking about mustard and ricin, isn't it?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Someone has been watching too much Breaking Bad.
Are pressure cookers used in the production of ricin from castor beans? Because when pressure cookers are outlawed, only outlaws will pressure cook!
No need for that -- after the Boston Marathon incident, anyone even entering Acme Kitchen Supplies stores will go on the terrorist watch list.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
John McAfee made some far-out claims a few months ago about Mexican cartels helping Muslim terrorists smuggle tons of ricin into the USA.
Let's hope to all that's holy that he was just bat-shit crazy and the allegations are not true, because if they are then thousands of people could be killed by the alleged "tons of ricin"
It is blatantly obvious that if only we had $Politically_Impossible_Ineffective_Action_Advocated_for_Unrelated_Reasons, this tragedy would have been avoided.
Those who are blaming $Different_Reason_For_Different_Unrelated_Reasons, are just cynically using the current crisis for their own political gain!
Reminds me of this story: John McAfee predicted it a few months ago. Just like his software, he couldn't stop anything.
McAfee is a bit crazy, but if he's right, then the corrupt Belize government along with Nicaragua helped Hezbollah and Iran commit terrorist attacks in the US with ricin. Yeah, it sounds crazy.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Smuggle it? You can grow it in your own front yard! The Castor Bean isn't an illegal plant.
http://waynesword.palomar.edu/plmar99.htm
If the feds want whoever is putting this stuff in letters, just look for a avid gardener with a few of these in their yard.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Excellent point. One that I've been attempting to make repeatedly with my unresponsive elected asshatz and anyone else who will listen. Emotional anecdotes are a ridiculous basis for public policy. If some serial child rapist escapes justice because the police obtained evidence with an illegal search, that doesn't mean that we need to undermine the 4th Amendment so that no child rapist ever escapes justice.
Yes, the murders and attempted murders in Boston clearly demonstrate that a person intent on violence and mass murder will find a way to do it, with or without firearms. In a free society, people can and will abuse their freedoms. Unfortunately, there are many people who would obviously prefer the "safety" of a total police state as opposed to endure the entirely minuscule risks associated with freedom.
From your first paragraph, maybe the problem is the public schools not teaching people about the concept of probability or statistical likelihood?
Not that I disagree but this could be a much more difficult case to figure out because ricin is a much easier substance to get ahold of than an anthrax culture.
There is no relation between the 2nd amendment and a bombing. Anyone who puts that out there is clearly spouting without thinking.
What liberty and freedom can they take away after the bombing? Well, they can get heavier on public surveillance. After all "if there were cameras on every corner for every angle, the perpetrator(s) would have been recorded!" As for attempted poisoning? Let your mind run wild but once again, cameras on mail boxes would probably be an excuse there as well but there would probably be better ideas such as "can't mail things without a biometric stamp and associated universal ID."
It's time we stand up to the big bean lobby and institute a background check before all bean purchases. Why does anybody need more than 1 can of beans for supper? You don't, which is why we need to limit high capacity bags of beans to no more than 10 ounces. Additionally, we need to ban all assault beans -- baked beans containing bacon or pork. How many more bean incidents? How much more suffering must we endure?
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Why are people smart enough to make something like this...so stupid as to think that the people they name on the letters come anywhere near them?
Newsflash to any mail-related ter'rists in training: Bob Shmoe the Senator doesn't open his mail. He doesn't read it. He doesn't even find out about it. It's some intern or minimum-wage lackey.
Please help metamoderate.
you're completely full of shit
Really? Here's a typical Hollywood type on the subject:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/16/actor-blames-boston-attack-on-gun-culture-2nd-amendment-must-go/
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Lolwut? You sound ridiculous.
In french, a castor is a beaver. Reading "castor beans" is somewhat confusing.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Has anyone else noticed that N Korea has been making a lot of noise the past month
Monday was the national celebration for the leader's grandfather the founder of N Korea. A day many analysts pointed at as a likely turning point in their ramp-up.
Tuesday Ricin letters were delivered to the White House and other locations.
I think I need to find a blank to go hide under.
Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
Only a teabagger would be dumb enough to think that such an act would be effective.
Effective at what? A response is underway — if effecting that response was the intent, the act was effective.
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
Quite an assumption. Who's to say it isn't an anti-war activist? Or an Occupy person? Or literally anyone else in the world?
When you pay extra for a black-market pressure cooker with the serial number filed off, then you're getting too paranoid.
I've seen FB posts saying essentially, "We MUST do something to make sure this can never happen again".
Apparently, these people want a police state, since that's the only scenario where there's even a reasonable probability of that.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
If we were to hold gun owners accountable for their weapons, then it would be a lot harder for the thieves to get them. Of course, your average gun nut considers proper control to be too emasculating, so they are always complaining about their penile replacements being under threat.
"Source."
This is premature BS. This info is based on the first tests, which were not conclusive. That's why your "source" says they are "waiting for further tests results"!!!
Actually, it's not anecdotal at all.
In response to someone FB post on how Switzerland offers decomm'd assault rifles to every male, I looked up gun ownership and deaths from guns by country. I chose first world, relatively lawful societies so as not to skew the data with lawless places or countries with insurrections. I chose Finland, US, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, and (shoot, can't remember the other two). That's a pretty wide range of laws concerning guns, and a huge disparity in density of guns and people.
The result - 1 death per year for every 8000 guns. Regardless of population or # of guns. The std deviation was in the 300-400 range, iirc. It was a tight grouping. Regardless, fewer guns == fewer deaths from guns. Even in a place like Switzerland where every practically owner is military trained. Even in a place like Japan where they are nearly outlawed. More guns = more deaths / fewer guns = fewer deaths.
Nothing will stop the crazy that was Newtown or Virginia Tech, but fewer guns will, statistically, reduce the number of people who die from gun wounds - and it's 1:1.
FWIW, I'm a gun owner - have been for 20+ years. I'm also in favor of both 100%, kept-on-file background checks and 3 round capacity maximums. Then again, I used to deal with explosives as a hobby, and have friends who manufacture legally. Everything there is fully regulated, licensed, tracked, and recorded. Then again, you almost never see an IED made from mainstream pyrotechnic materials. It's more frequently homemade or common household materials, or commercially purchased black powder which - interestingly - is the only pyro explosive you can get and store without a license. Why? Because gun owners and the NRA bought the 25lb exemption in congress.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
If your conspiracy theory is true, it's absolutely fantastic news. Consider this: the top leadership of a nuclear armed state decide to send out international assassins on a murderous rampage. The result: two home-made pressure-cooker bombs kill two random civilians, and a pitifully ineffective poison attack is caught before reaching the same city as the intended targets. If this level of threat is all we have to worry about when North Korea goes into full-fledged wacko murder mode, I'm immensely relieved; I'd think even a pitiful nation like that could pull off something a bit less amateurish.
You guys are way off, let's just outlaw physical mail, who needs it with email now anyways.
"So please describe a situation where an honest person can defend themselves without a weapon?"
Eliminate all firearms
Okay, that's a ridiculous question and an equally ridiculous answer. It is, in fact, impossible to eliminate firearms. Case closed.
The thing is, you will never prevent an assailant from killing people in public with a firearm. Unless, of course, you are willing to mow down bystanders yourself.
And you will never stop a one-on-one assault unless the attacker is a bad shot, even if you own a weapon. The Prosecutor and his wife in Texas? He owned a gun, and it was in his house the day he and his wife were shot. In fact, it is believed he was going to get his weapon when he was gunned down. Guns don't protect you.
Believing that a gun will stop an assailant is a false security. The best you can hope for is that the attacker is a terrible shot and there's nobody behind him when you shoot.
The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun in a public place is the bad guy running out of ammunition.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Why do images of Tyrone Biggums opening Senator Daschel's mail come to mind. (Am I dating myself here?!)
You know the statistics support gun control right? Wealthy countries with more gun control than the US have lower fatal homicide and suicide rates.
Mass shootings are anecdotal, on both sides. There are real statistics, and they're not on your side.
Allow me to illustrate for you who your REAL enemy is in terms of gun control. It's not the politicians. Contrary to popular /. opinion, our politicians are not stupid. It has, I guarantee you, occurred to at least some of our elected representatives that a ban on assault rifles is stupid and doesn't solve the problem. It has also occurred to many of them that the problem really is mentally ill people. However, there are two constituencies that are driving them to gun control measures. The first constituency happens to be socially & fiscally conservative pro-gun owners who insist on better policing of existing firearm regulations (good), and also reduce taxation for everyone in general, thus cutting down government waste and programs. This is admirable, except that mental health programs, asylums, and facilities in general that would benefit society by taking the mentally ill out of mainstream society and rehabilitating them are among the first local/county/state/federal funding expenditures to get cut because there's not enough of a constituency to represent them.
The second constituency, and the one with FAR more electoral power than the NRA, are suburban women voters. If you want to know WHO exactly is driving the push for gun control and pushing all the politicians in the country to do something about guns, it is this group. These are the voters who are working mothers, who have never grown up in a house with guns. Their children go to suburban schools very similar to Columbine and Sandy Hook. They've never been victims of violent crime. They've never had cause to fear a tyrannical government. But they DO know gun nuts. They all know at least one person who talks about government conspiracies, who brings up Obama at holiday dinners and how he's taking the county to damnation and socialism, who whispers darkly of the coming apocalypse over beers with their husbands on the back porch, and who owns a goddamn arsenal of scary-looking assault weapons. To these women, and their families, the Enemy is not urban black thugs. Nor is it black-clad government agents. The Enemy is the crazy gun nut down the street who doesn't seem to have his head screwed on straight, is paranoid and suspicious of everyone, has a whole lot of guns, and is constantly ranting about the government and conspiracies, and how stupid his or her fellow citizens are.
If you want to know the real reason why your gun rights are being taken away, go look in the mirror. You, and others like you, scare the hell out of these people who have no reason to fear the entities you fear. They fear YOU, and they are asking our government to do something about YOU. And they outnumber the NRA, they outnumber the responsible gun owners, and their voices will be heard. It is not a question of if gun control and an assault weapon ban is going to be enacted, but when. And bear this in mind: the day that women take to the streets and march in favor of gun control, is the day the Second Amendment will fall. Why? Because your Enemy won't be the black-clad federal troops coming to take away your guns, it's going to be the scared mothers, grandmothers, daughters, and sisters who are marching in the streets demanding political action because they don't feel safe around YOU. And let me ask you this: when it comes to that, are you willing to kill those women to keep your guns? Because THEY are the ones who the federal troops will obey. And THEY outnumber YOU.
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
The choice of him and the president just seems rather dissonant.
Do you not get that people that try to kill other people in a calculated pre-meditated way are INSANE?
The guy who shot Giffords was also an anti-Palin nut!
As far as they are concerned, whoever they are trying to kill has offended the bunnies that live on the moon or are stealing their semen through the TV. There is no carefully pulling apart of logical motive, there is just understanding they are wrong in the head and could do anything.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You miss the point of background checks.
No we don't. It's for the government to track who has legal guns among people that will not commit crimes.
It is to make it harder - ON AVERAGE - for people with a history of violent and/or criminal behavior to acquire firearms.
Well then it's stupid on the face of it because "ON AVERAGE" all criminals simply buy or steal guns illegally anyway, since they don't want something that could be traced back to them. They are criminals after all.
In the end all you are doing is tracking the people who will ON AVERAGE never commit a crime, and make it harder for them to buy guns than the criminals that may kill them.
I can't believe that someone on Slashdot is taking the side of the jackboots, so soon after we all feared that civil rights would be further reduced after the Boston bombings. Look no further; reduction is underway. If you are at all about protecting rights you are against further gun regulations; if you are not against gun regulation well then you are just going to have to lay back and take whatever further noxious restrictions result from Boston. Registration when buying kitchen supplies? If gun regulation passes I will be in full support of it, because why go halfway?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
That makes no attempt to control for any number of other factors. Its not scientific at all. There are any number of social difference between the US and those other countries that may impact homicide rates. Your own link points out we are pretty average in terms of other crimes. You expect us to just accept that all these people using guns to kill each other would just decide to stay home if they had to stab on another instead. Bullshit.
You don't know anything based on those numbers. You have at most an observation and a hypothesis that the availability of firearms may explain the increased homicide rates. There is nothing rising to the level of proof that we have fewer homicides in the USA with more restricted gun rights. There is even less evidence to support we would have few mass homicides.
So yea nice try.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Amazon.
You really are stupid, you know that? We're not proposing a ban on steel, we're proposing a ban on the ultimate object that makes pulling a trigger the difference between life and death. Just like castor beans aren't illegal to walk around with sacks of but it is illegal to walk around with sacks of ricin because it is the final product that allows that person to cause death quickly and without much effort. Are you saying that ricin, a schedule 1 substance, should be sold to whoever wants it because the act of using it to kill people is already illegal? The fact that I have to explain this to you really illustrates the frustration of this whole gun control debate. I bet the whole concept of "weaponized" is lost on you when we're talking about mustard and ricin, isn't it?
You're a condescending asshole you know that?
Ricin's sole purpose is killing people. And you have to take some fairly extraordinary steps to make sure that doesn't happen (safe handling and suchlike). Guns can be used for a wide range of purposes, one of which is killing people, but many of which have nothing to do with hurting people like hunting, sport shooting, target practice, or tree trimming (true story). To take your argument to the completely opposite (and equally invalid) extreme - we should obviously ban hammers since they are used to kill people sometimes.
The simple fact is that "assault weapons" are not the problem. Handguns, if anything, are the problem. But even so, suicides by gun outnumber homicides by a ratio of 2:1. And deaths by car accident outnumber both put together by almost 2:1 again. And death from complications from fatness are probably 10:1 over car accidents. It seems to me that the more it is the case that a person dies due to their own actions (all of fatness, and about half of car accidents) then we are more accepting of that because, well, they took that risk. But with guns, we get completely irrational about it because...they're scary? I guess?
Because when pressure cookers are outlawed, only outlaws will pressure cook!
On the bright side, it will help the American obesity epidemic because KFC will go out of business.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
And nobody has actually done controls on those statistics to eliminate the very real differences, so they mean nothing.
What of the multitude of firearm related massacres around the world we never hear of because it did not involve a United States Citizen?
We hear about them. We just don't hear about them from the same country every month or two.
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
Due to the ambiguity of the English language, it could be construed to be either plural or singular, and your comment could easily be read as a general statement. Neither did your statement clearly indicate you meant innocent and unrelated people.
Many politically-motivated murders have been committed by very arguably sane people.
Studies have been done on this subject and they don't line up with the gun lobby rhetoric. Please read this and digest it:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/04/mass-shootings-rampages-rising-data
I think what it boils down to is that mass murders are out of their minds and often suicidal. The power and attention they want from the rampage becomes the last and only thing they care about, even to the exclusion of their own lives.
Having some armed people in the vicinity does not deter these maniacs.
The gun culture has worked to protect people who handle and traffic in explosives:
NRA Lobbyists Stymie Effort to Trace Explosives
There have been studies, controlled in a variety of ways, of gun ownership and violence. Even purely observational studies, although they're not the best evidence, do contribute evidence. Evidence that is considerably better than the anecdotes the OP was railing against, which are essentially the same as the unsupported arguments given by anti-gun control proponents.
However, if you want definitive evidence, there's nothing like an experiment. There have already been experiments done where individual US states have enacted tougher gun control laws. They have less gun violence. Perhaps a bigger experiment needs to be tried... a longitudinal one. Take a country that has fairly lax gun control, a fairly high rate of gun violence, and good gun violence statistics. Say, the US. Enact tough gun control laws. Continue to gather gun-violence statistics for the next, oh, twenty or thirty years. Analyze.
In America, the Beaver Bean would definitly be a reference to the clitoris...or the name of a super sweet punk band!
Oh the epic, award winning documentary, Team America starring Alec Baldwin, has already taught us this is typical for NK and if we don't try to contain this threat then there may be a severe chance that Mt Rushmore would suffer. Also I do believe the UN is currently authoring a VERY stern letter.
I apologize for any negativity I attempted to infer by the final wording of my post (though the actual debate material I feel is my honest assement). I wrote it before you I got your last reply to the car article. I thought we were still taking sniper shots. Can we be /. buddies?
the recipients are possibly constipated? (back-history: castor-oil used to be a cure for constipation)
There have already been experiments done where individual US states have enacted tougher gun control laws. They have less gun violence.
Name one that has exceeded the overall trend toward lower violent crime rates in the US.