CASE CLOSED … what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks?

* Bruce Ivins Wasn’t the Anthrax Culprit

Posted by DXer on May 26, 2009

Richard Spertzel wrote in the Wall Street Journal (8-5-09) …

  • Over the past week the media was gripped by the news that the FBI was about to charge Bruce Ivins, a leading anthrax expert, as the man responsible for the anthrax letter attacks in September/October 2001.
  • But despite the seemingly powerful narrative that Ivins committed suicide because investigators were closing in, this is still far from a shut case.
  • I believe this is another mistake in the investigation.
  • The spores could not have been produced at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, where Ivins worked, without many other people being aware of it.
  • Furthermore, the equipment to make such a product does not exist at the institute.
  • The latest line of speculation asserts that the anthrax’s DNA, obtained from some of the victims, initially led investigators to the laboratory where Ivins worked. But the FBI stated a few years ago that a complete DNA analysis was not helpful in identifying what laboratory might have made the product.
  • The FBI has not officially released information on why it focused on Ivins, and whether he was about to be charged or arrested.
  • And when the FBI does release this information, we should all remember that the case needs to be firmly based on solid information that would conclusively prove that a lone scientist could make such a sophisticated product.
  • From what we know so far, Bruce Ivins, although potentially a brilliant scientist, was not that man.

Mr. Spertzel, head of the biological-weapons section of Unscom from 1994-99, was a member of the Iraq Survey Group. Read the entire article at …


CC - front cover - smallIt seems that the case against the FBI is far stronger than the FBI’s supposed case against Dr. Bruce Ivins. It is infuriating that the FBI would charge a man in a crime of mass murder with so little factual basis to support its conclusions.

It was skepticism like that expressed by Mr. Spertzel that prompted me to write CASE CLOSED. My focus in the novel is on why the FBI failed to solve the case. It is my theory that they were told not to.

Who would have the power to divert the FBI investigation?

And why would they do it?

see an introduction to CASE CLOSED at … * see CASE CLOSED VIDEO on YouTube

CASE CLOSED is on amazon (Kindle now, paperback in mid-June) … * purchase CASE CLOSED at amazon (Kindle format)

2 Responses to “* Bruce Ivins Wasn’t the Anthrax Culprit”

  1. DXer said

    But so who did Dr. Ivins send virulent Ames in 1998. It had to have been someone he knew and trusted.

  2. DXer said

    Harry Helms on Richard Spertzel

    “Richard Spertzel is correct. There are several problems with concluding Ivins was the “lone gunman” behind the anthrax attacks:

    1) The FBI has not placed him in, or near, Princeton, NJ on September 18, 2001 when the letters were mailed. The FBI has been leaking a story that Ivins supposedly made a round trip to Princeton after work—-arriving back home in the early morning hours—-to mail the letters, and Princeton was selected because Ivins had a weird fixation on a certain sorority. But so far there has been zero concrete evidence—-such as receipts for gasoline purchases, testimony of others about such a trip, etc.—–presented to support that theory.

    2) Even if Ivins was involved, that doesn’t mean he was solely responsible. Preparing the post-9/11 anthrax attacks was not an easy, quick task, and it would have taken superhuman efforts for such an attack to have been conceived, prepared, and executed in just one week after the September 11 attacks.

    3) There were concerns immediately after the 9/11 attacks about possible biowarfare attacks. Richard Cohen, a columinist for the Washington Post, recently admitted, “The attacks were not entirely unexpected. I had been told soon after Sept. 11 to secure Cipro, the antidote to anthrax. The tip had come in a roundabout way from a high government official, and I immediately acted on it. I was carrying Cipro way before most people had ever heard of it” (The link to Cohen’s full story is

    4) One of the 9/11 hijackers, Ahmed al Haznawi, received treatment on June 25, 2001 at the emergency room of Holy Cross Hospital in Fort Lauderdale, Florida for a skin lesion. He was accompanied by Ziad Jarrah, who was to be the pilot of United flight 93. Dr. Christos Tsonas examined al Haznawi but was unable to identify the cause of the lesion; al Haznawi said it was caused by being bumped by a heavy suitcases. Dr. Tsonas wrote al Haznawi a prescription for antibiotics. After the 9/11 attacks, Dr. Tsonas was questioned by investigators and shown photos of anthrax-caused skin lesions. Dr. Tsonas said the photos were consistent with the lesion he observed on al Haznawi.

    I reject any theories or suggestions the U.S. government was behind the post-9/11 anthrax attacks or is engaged in some conspiracy to cover up the truth about them. But I do feel the FBI and other agencies have so committed themselves to the “single perpetrator” hypothesis they are ignoring anything that conflicts with the theory and ignoring alternative explanations, much as they did in 1996 with Richard Jewell and the bombings at the Atlanta Olympics. Maybe the FBI has more conclusive evidence pointing to Ivins as the only person behind these attacks; if so, I hope they quickly disclose it.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: