Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 30, 2011
see also …
… we invite Mr. Willman to re-think some of his conclusions
based on dramatic information
which was not available to him when he wrote “The Mirage Man.”
Excerpts from DXer’s recent comment …
see the entire comment at …
The priority now is to turn to the documentary evidence available
on the disputed issues
- It turns out that Gregory Saathoff, author and initiator of the psychiatrist report, was intimately involved in planning how the FBI interrogated Dr. Ivins throughout the Spring of 2008
- Dr. Saathoff was definitely a stakeholder and not independent. He was an active part of the investigation of Dr. Ivins. He was the FBI’s expert.
I don’t see any evidence that Dr. Ivins was involved
in the anthrax mailings,
although I see lots of fascinating potential leads
in the documentary evidence.
- All I see is a theory that has strong parallels to a Hatfill Theory accompanied by dramatic withholding of documents and mischaracterization or misunderstanding of the documents.
- Respectfully, Special Agent Lawrence Alexander and his colleagues should ask that the DOJ FOIA office produce the nonsealed documents in the Stevens litigation.
- Lawrence Alexander and AUSA Rachel Lieber should have DOJ produce the September 17, 2001 email from Bruce Ivins to Mara Linscott dated September 17, 2001. Rachel claimed it had been written from Dr. Ivins work computer. But USAMRC FOIA people emphatically dispute that after careful double-checking.
Let’s produce all of Dr. Ivins lab notebooks from the period
and develop the timeline.
- I see an awful lot of disclosure about whether Dr. Ivins blindfolded Teddy Bears when he was 6 but so far have overlooked any disclosure that the FBI falsely told Dr. Ivins that Dr. Heine had fingered him.
- They had told him that they were going to call his vulnerable daughter before the grand jury.
- They insisted to Amanda that Dr. Ivins was a murderer.
- Dr. Ivins fiercely loved his daughter and son and was very protective of Amanda given her previous suicide attempt.
- I see an awful lot of effort to claim that Dr. Ivins made a dried powder on those specific dates — and at the same time AUSA Rachel Lieber refused my written request to produce the lab notebook pages written on those nights.
Key lab notebook pages are still being withheld
and the GAO needs to probe
who is responsible for any continued withholding.
- The FBI took the only copy from USAMRIID and so USAMRIID cannot produce them.
- The DOJ investigators and prosecutors should back full production under FOIA of Dr. Ivins lab notebooks for the relevant period — 1998 – 2001, as well as production of a copy of the 9/17/2001 email to Mara Linscott.
so certain ... and so wrong
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: AUSA Rachel Lieber, David Willman, Dr. Henry S. Heine, Dr. Ivins' lab notebooks, Mara Linscott, The Mirage Man | 26 Comments »
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 28, 2011
a fast-paced thriller … driven by a plausible plot …
allows the reader to think through how the FBI investigation
of the anthrax attacks might have proceeded
- My novel CASE CLOSED is of course fiction, written in 2008 before this blog started.
- However, the more I’ve learned since I wrote the book, much of it through contributors to this blog, the more convinced I am that the questions I raised in my story and the scenario I suggested are very much on the trail of the truth.
- Many readers, including one highly placed member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, have called CASE CLOSED “prescient” and “frightening” because it is very likely to contain elements of whatever did actually happen.
Here’s how to get CASE CLOSED on Kindle for PC ($5.00) …
1. to download Kindle for PC (it’s free!) to your computer just click …
2. then download CASE CLOSED for Kindle to your laptop by clicking …
Posted in Uncategorized | 7 Comments »
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 27, 2011
UPDATE 5/27 … Greg Gordon writes …
- The FBI said the bureau had received the letter and would respond directly to Nadler.
LMW: let’s hope it doesn’t take 7 months to answer this time
UPDATE 5/27 … Jim White writes on firedoglake …
FBI Ignored, Hid Data Potentially Excluding Bruce Ivins as Anthrax Killer
- The FBI ignored as potentially erroneous a measurement of silicon in one anthrax sample and then hid this information from Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).
- Even more importantly, the high silicon measurements in at least two samples also were coupled with high tin measurements, opening up the possibility that silicon was added to the attack material in a form that is not mentioned in any of the FBI documents.
- Significantly, it is virtually impossible that Bruce Ivins, whom the FBI has concluded acted on his own to carry out the attacks, would have been able to perform the necessary chemical manipulations involved in this treatment of the spores.
- Ivins likely also would not have had access to the necessary laboratory equipment to perform this treatment.
- Congressman Nadler & FBI Director Mueller
Congressman Jerrold Nadler writes to FBI Director Mueller (5/25/11) …
Nadler specifically asked Mueller why the FBI appears to have provided incorrect information on the case to Nadler and the Judiciary Committee subsequent to a September 16, 2008 oversight hearing on the FBI.
excerpts from Nadler’s letter are shown below …
see the entire letter at …
see also …
… among many other posts and comments on this blog dealing with the silicon signature
and its often ignored significance in identifying the perpetrator(s) of the anthrax attacks
excerpts from Congressman Nadler’s letter
- On September 16, 2008 … I asked you the following: “[W]hat was the percentage of weight of the silicon in the powders that your experts examined?”
LMW NOTE: it took 7 months for Director Mueller to respond
to what was a very simple factual question !!!
- On April 17, 2009, (the FBI) responded with the following answer:
- FBI Laboratory results indicated that the spore powder on the Leahy letter contained 14,470 ppm of silicon (1.4%).
- The spore powder on the New York Post letter was found to have silicon present in the sample; however, due to the limited amount of material, a reliable quantitative measurement was not possible.
- Insufficient quantifies of spore powder on both the Daschle and Brokaw letters precluded analysis of those samples.
- A February 15, 2011 report by the National Academy of Sciences (“NAS report”) … raises three questions about this DOJ/FBI response to me.
- First, with respect to the anthrax on the letter sent to Senator Leahy, the NAS report shows on pages 66 and 67 (Table 4.4) that the silicon content found by the FBI was 1.4% in one sample and 1.8% in a second sample.
Nadler: Why were both figures not provided to me
in response to my questions?
- Second, the NAS report shows on pages 66 and 67 (Table 4.4) that the FBI found the silicon content in the New York Post letter anthrax to be 10% when the bulk material was measured by mass and 1-2% when individual spore coats were measured by mass per spore.
Nadler: Why was neither piece of data provided to me
in response to my questions?
- Third and finally, the NAS report raises questions about the appropriateness of the measurements taken of the anthrax on the letter to the New York Post.
- (the NAS said) … additional samples should have been analyzed to determine representativeness.
- If such data exist, they were not provided to the committee.
- Lacking this information, one cannot rule out the intentional addition of a silicon-based substance to the New York Post letter, in a failed attempt to enhance dispersion.
- The committee notes that powders with dispersion characteristics similar to the letter material could be produced without the addition of a dispersant.
Nadler: Were additional samples tested to determine the extent
to which the ones examined were representative
of the New York Post letter material?
If not, why not?
- If the FBI did do these additional tests, please provide the resulting data to me and NAS.
LMW COMMENT …
It seems clear from Congressman Nadler’s letter that FBI Director Mueller has been less than forthcoming to the House Judiciary Committee on crucial issues regarding the investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks.
The Congress and the American people need to know the truth and also why Director Mueller has avoided fully stating that truth.
The FBI’s publicly presented case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus:
… no evidence,
…. no witnesses,
…. an impossible timeline,
…. science that proves innocence instead of guilt.
So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?
As regular readers of this blog well know,
I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …
- The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
- The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
- The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons …THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: *** 2001 anthrax attacks, *** Amerithrax, *** Dr. Bruce Ivins, *** FBI anthrax investigation, anthrax documents withheld, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Congressman Nadler & anthrax, FBI Director Mueller, FBI withholds evidence, Greg Gordon, obama and mueller, silicon levels in attack anthrax | 23 Comments »
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 27, 2011
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: *** 2001 anthrax attacks, *** Amerithrax, *** FBI anthrax investigation, Brokaw letter, Daschle letter, Dugway Proving Ground, Ft. Detrick USAMRIID, Nov 2001 meeting, NY Post letter, Porton Down UK, southern Research Institute (SRI) | 6 Comments »
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 23, 2011
PROMED post by Dr. Martin Hugh-Jones …
- This [recent McClatchy] report is parallel to the evidence we — Barbara Rosenberg, Stuart Jacobsen, and myself — submitted to the NAS (National Academy of Sciences) committee last summer (2010).
- A fuller version is in the final stages of preparation for submission to a suitable journal.
The sad part about this is that Sandia provided the FBI
with key evidence on the levels of silicone in letter-content spores
in late October 2001.
- If the latter had had the wit to follow up on it at that time all this would be history and the true perpetrator(s) suitably dealt with.
- Also tracking past sales of silane and siloxane chemicals to institutes and agencies handling Bacillus anthracis would have produced a short list for immediate visits and interviews by FBI agents with search warrants, and then the names of who would have had access to the products of their polymerization research.
Dr. Martin Hugh-Jones
Dr. Hugh-Jones is one of the foremost authorities on anthrax. He is currently Coordinator of the World Health Organization (WHO) Working Group on Anthrax Research and Control. He also has served as Chairman of the WHO/Veterinary Public Health Working Group: “Anthrax: Epidemiology and Information.” In addition, Dr. Hugh-Jones participated in the investigation of the 1979 anthrax outbreak in Sverdlovsk (now known as Yekaterinburg) in the former USSR. He was in Moscow and Yekaterinburg in 1992 when the Russian government admitted the source of the outbreak to have been an accidental spore emission from a biological warfare facility.
see also …
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: *** 2001 anthrax attacks, *** Amerithrax, *** Dr. Bruce Ivins, *** FBI anthrax investigation, Dr. Martin Hugh-Jones, proMED | 8 Comments »
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 23, 2011
David House & Bruce Ivins
Carol Rose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, writes (5/13/11) …
- Freedom of association is so vital to our democracy that the framers put it in the First Amendment, alongside freedoms of speech, press, religion, and petition.
- Defending that right for all Americans is why the ACLU today is filing a lawsuit in federal court in Boston on behalf of a 24-year-old computer programmer and Cambridge activist named David House.
- The case challenges the government’s targeting and suspicionless search and seizure at the border of David’s computer and camera, which occurred as a result of his association with the Bradley Manning Support Network.
- Initially, the ACLU sent a letter to government agencies demanding the return of David’s equipment and requesting that any copies of David’s personal information be deleted.
- Immediately after the ACLU sent the letter, the government shipped David’s hardware back to him.
- They did not address David’s request that the government delete all copies of his data and clarify whether Homeland Security had shared his data with other agencies.
- Today, David and the ACLU are filing a lawsuit in Federal Court challenging the government’s assertion that it can seize, search, copy and disseminate information seized from a personal computer or other electronic devices without a reasonable basis for suspicion. The lawsuit asks that the court “Declare that the prolonged seizure of [David’s] laptop computer and other electronic devices and the review, copying, retention and dissemination of their contents without reasonable suspicion violates the Fourth and First Amendments to the United States Constitution.”
read the entire article at … http://www.aclu.org/blog/author/Carol-Rose%2C-Executive-Director%2C-ACLU-of-Massachusetts
LMW COMMENT …
Another arrogant government assertion of its right to do whatever it damn well pleases, not unlike the FBI’s unsupported accusations and subsequent stonewalling behavior in the anthrax case. National security is very important, but so are the rights of American citizens, including David House and Bruce Ivins.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: *** Dr. Bruce Ivins, david house, freedom of association | 27 Comments »