Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ricin Tainted Letter Sent to Senator and Possibly the President

Posted by Unknown on from the meant-to-use-sugar dept.

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.

28 of 461 comments (clear)

  1. Pres letter does have Ricin. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Source.

    1. Re:Pres letter does have Ricin. by rwa2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Oh Pollux" - says some Brit constellation.

  2. Profile of attacker already available.. by nweaver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its someone stupid enough to think a Senator opens his own mail. (Shamelessly stolen from Twitter)

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:Profile of attacker already available.. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's also an odd set of choices. The senator, going by his interest group endorsements and voting record, is pretty much a stock Missisippi conservative. Apparently a trifle too fond of earmarks to be a real hit with team Tea Party; but solid numbers on pro-life, pro-gun, anti-tax. The choice of him and the president(Obama's reputation for liberalism is only deserved in certain areas; but boy is it ever persistent...) just seems rather dissonant.

      As an expression of general distaste, you'd expect them to hit the president and, say, the majority and minority leaders, or the Appropriations Commitee. As an expression of a specific ideology, you'd expect targets that are all opposed to it...

    2. Re:Profile of attacker already available.. by Synerg1y · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also... what exactly does skin contact with ricin do?

      According to this, nothing:

      http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/17/ricin-scare-in-washington-fast-facts-about-the-deadly-poison/

  3. Here we go again by cyberchondriac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Here we go again by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Informative

      If we could create legislation that could keep unstable people from bombs, we would. Since we can with guns, we will.

      Really? The owner of the guns in the CT killings would have passed any of the newly proposed background checks. She owned the guns legally. They were stolen from her by someone not allowed to have the, who killed her before moving on to kill other people and himself. Which restraint on the 2nd being tossed around would have prevented that crazy guy from being crazy? Please be specific. Thanks.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, it's obviously false flag. Or obviously Middle Eastern. Or obviously domestic. Or obviously FBI-inspired conspirators that they didn't stop in time. Or any other "obviously" thing. *eyeroll*

    3. Re:Here we go again by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm truly curious what background check will keep someone from stealing another person's legally obtained weapon?

      Are you suggesting that if you have a family member with issues (I wanted to type "crazy", but that's derogatory IMO) then you shouldn't be able to pass a background check? Where does this kind of logic end and what personal liberties are you willing to forgo to allow a database of this size to happen?

      --
      21st Century Renaissance Man
    4. Re:Here we go again by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Keeping guns locked up is a good idea, and not having guns in a house with people with known mental instabilities is an even better idea. I'm just not sure we need to spend legislative effort on creating laws. We should enforce the current ones, although getting rid of the gun show loophole is a good idea.

      --
      21st Century Renaissance Man
    5. Re:Here we go again by ubermiester · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You miss the point of background checks. It is not to stop individual crimes. It is to make it harder - ON AVERAGE - for people with a history of violent and/or criminal behavior to acquire firearms. Think abusive spouses who don't like their ex's being with someone new. Or a stalker who wants to take their obsession to the next level. Or a thug with a record who wants to pick up the latest in thug technology. WIthout a federal background check, states that allow people to carry concealed weapons into bars and schools in the name of "freedom" would do nothing to stop such individuals from acquiring firearms.

      The 20 children killed in the Newtown massacre (say that out loud if you are unsure of why people want action) are a drop in the bucket when it comes to gun violence. THOUSANDS have been killed by guns since then, and many of those crimes would almost certainly not have occurred if the US had two things: 1) effective and universal gun regulations, 2) a less fanatical obsession with violence as a solution to people's problems (think "War on ___" or how every "action" movie poster includes someone holding a weapon). I am not one to shy away from criticizing the entertainment industry for their pandering, and hope the increasing number of large-scale public tragedies involving guns will begin to turn the tide against this long-standing trend.

      But i digress.

      The ridiculous meme that says something like: "Chicago has strict gun laws and they have lots of gun violence" completely ignores the fact that many if not all of the guns used in Chicago come from outside the city's jurisdiction. The same goes for NY, Washington DC, Miami, etc. These cities know what the problem is, but they cant do anything about it because neighboring states ignore it in the name of "freedom". Recent studies have shown that a large percentage of the guns used in NY-Metro area crimes originate as legit purchases in states like Virginia where the gun lobby has fear-mongered the local legislature away from even the most basic regulations.

      Consider what would happen if you couldn't go to a "gun show" in someone's backyard and pick up a bunch of handguns to sell on the black market in Chicago. Where would the average street thug get their weapons? Russian arms dealers? 3D printing? Granted there are plenty of weapons already out there, but is "it's hard so what's the point" really an excuse?

      And background checks do not address the problem of what you can buy once you pass. Why would anyone need a semi-automatic rifle with armor piercing rounds and a 30-round magazine?!? For that entire heard of delicious armor-plated deer you ran out of standard rounds trying to slaughter? To shoot at UN tanks when they invade Idaho?

      Please explain...

    6. Re:Here we go again by JackieBrown · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The ridiculous meme that says something like: "Chicago has strict gun laws and they have lots of gun violence" completely ignores the fact that many if not all of the guns used in Chicago come from outside the city's jurisdiction. The same goes for NY, Washington DC, Miami, etc.

      Then why don't the cities around them have the same level of gun violence? The problem with these cities - and the entire country if the politicians have their way - is that honest people do not have guns to defend themselves against people that illegally obtain them.

      Your comment is the perfect example of "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns."

  4. There is only one option. by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
    1. Re:There is only one option. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That... is really not true. A pretty decent chunk of business matters get handled via snail mail (not all or even most by any means, but enough to make it non-negligible). And also, people do still send personal mail (letters and such), as not everyone has internet nor wants to. Call them foolish if you want, but they are still using the service for non-spam reasons.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    2. Re:There is only one option. by ScentCone · · Score: 3

      But ricin is a banned substance, right?

      Right, just like shooting people is a banned act.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  5. Wow ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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 ...

    1. Re:Wow ... by cffrost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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 ...

      Has it? I think the actual government-using-1984-as-an-instruction-manual stuff has gotten far more out of hand than your particular gripe.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    2. Re:Wow ... by Atrox+Canis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, snap! I see what you did there. You compared one person wanting to imprison another person with one person murdering 3 people and injuring 170+- more. Clearly your perspective is the proper one.

      --
      Charter Member of The Committee Group For The Elimination And Eradication Of Repetitive Redundancy
  6. So that's where the ricin went! by TechieRefugee · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've been wondering about that! Man, Walter trying to kill the president?! The finale of Breaking Bad is gonna kick ass!

  7. How do they test for this? by pclminion · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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?

  8. Re:So? by sycodon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Have you noticed that whenever something bad happens in America, to normal people, the next day or the same day, a letter with a "suspicious substance" is sent to a politician in D.C.?

    They must have a special unit called "All About Us" that just sends these out as needed.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  9. The name of the suspect is... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  10. Re:You're An Idiot by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  11. Idiot Status Reaffirmed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:Idiot Status Reaffirmed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      we're proposing a ban on the ultimate object that makes pulling a trigger the difference between life and death.

      Ah, so you're proposing a ban on people. I approve!

  12. John McAfee predicted it by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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."
  13. Re:Half-wits know better than this by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So the perpetrator was either immeasurably stupid and thoughtless

    Do you really think that is implausible?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  14. Re:The real dissonance by Fjandr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Premeditated murder does not mean one is insane.