* Dr. Bruce Ivins’ July 2003 through February 2004 emails will finally be released next week … there is still no satisfactory answer for the extended (unlawful) delays which amount to nothing less than a purposeful withholding of relevant information from the public and from the U.S. Congress … who is responsible for these delays? FBI Director Mueller? Attorney General Holder?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 11, 2010
The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”
I re-read the explanation below and then sent the following email …
- Forgive me, but it sure looks like a procedure devised to NOT release document rather than to actually comply with the intent and spirit of the FOIA law.
- Why does it require 3 levels of review?
- What is it that you are editing out of the released documents?
- Who devised such a procedure?
- Can you see why such actions diminish respect for government? And also diminish any sense of the integrity of the FBI, when it seems that all of this is devised to take so long that people lose interest.
- Well, we won’t.
- And in the end, when the whole truth is known, the FBI will look like fools for having asserted claims they cannot (or will not) prove.
- Of course by then most of those involved will probably have long retired, which may be the overriding objective of the delaying tactics.
- Am I too cynical? I wish I could believe so.
… So far, I have received no answer to these questions.
Dr. Bruce Ivins’ emails from July 2003 through February 2004 are expected to be released by the middle of next week.
I guess that’s some progress, but it seems unacceptable that nine years after the anthrax attacks and almost two years since the FBI said ‘Ivins did it” that another four years of emails remain to be released. I asked why and this was the answer …
- The e-mails must go through 3 layers of review prior to release.
- Each layer of review is one person deep.
- We work them in on a rolling basis in addition to our other duties/responsibilities.
- Currently I personally am working 30+ cases to include processing 3 case files that require 30-40,000 pages of documents to be processed.
I’m pretty sure that the person who gave that answer is not the person who made the rules; he’s just following them.
But it must be clear to everyone concerned that withholding documents (and I equate not releasing with withholding) simply exacerbates the suspicion many of us have that vital information is being kept from the public (and from the U.S. Congress).
Many of the documents released so far do nothing to support the FBI’s unproven assertion that ‘Ivins did it.’ In fact, the more we learn, the less likely it seems that the FBI could ever have proven it’s case in court, or even that they had a case credible enough to go to court with a living defendant.
So which is it?
- The FBI failed to solve the case (which is terrible)
- or they did solve the case and are keeping the truth hidden (worse)?