* tracking Dr. Ivins’ RMR-1029 anthrax; more questions for UM and LSU researchers
Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 28, 2009
tracking Dr. Ivins’ RMR-1029 anthrax;
more questions for UM and LSU researchers
The following email was sent to researchers who performed anthrax vaccine research at the University of Michigan (UM) and Louisiana State University (LSU) in 2001 …
Dr. James Baker has graciously replied to my earlier questions, stating …
- That work was done
- at USAMRIID by a microbiologist under Dr. Ivins direct supervision
- and at LSU under the direction of Dr. Hugh Jones.
- There was never any ‘distribution’ of anthrax and all the work done at UM used simulant organisms.
- I apologize if the citation was confusing.
Dr. Baker’s answer has been posted to the CASE CLOSED blog. There is a comment posted to that article (see … DXer said June 27, 2009 at 6:47 pm), which includes citations from various patent applications and other materials, and asks the following questions, which I am forwarding to you …
- When was the research at USAMRIID done? What month(s) and year(s)?
- When was the research at LSU done?
- Who was the microbiologist who worked under the supervision of Bruce Ivins at the BL-3 lab at USAMRIID?
- Who were the NanoBio scientists who worked under the supervision of Dr. Martin Hugh-Jones at LSU?
- Was Bruce Ivins-supplied virulent Ames at LSU?
- If so, was it still in existence at the time of the subpoenas during the mid-October 2001 through February 2002?
- What do the LSU researchers, including FBI genetics consultant Kimothy Smith, say about whether virulent Ames was at LSU and, if so, whether any supplied by Bruce Ivins was provided in response to the subpoena.
- What does Pamala Coker say? (she would have taken over by the time of the subpoena from Kimothy)
You may wonder why I am asking these questions. Who am I, and what right do I have to bother you so many years after these events took place?
I am a novelist, the author of CASE CLOSED, which presents a fictional scenario to explain why the FBI failed to solve the anthrax case. I started the CASE CLOSED blog to promote the novel, but it has taken on a life of its own as a forum for those who don’t believe the FBI’s accusation of Dr. Ivins (and a few who do) to present and argue their positions. This has stimulated me to continue to seek answers.
The FBI’s case simply does not wash. Why?
The central problem is that the FBI accused Dr. Ivins, claiming he is the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks, without ever proving its case. It is very convenient to the FBI to have charged a dead man, eight days after his alleged suicide, since this means they never have to go into court and actually prove their case.
The FBI has ever since their announcement refused to answer questions, even those from Congressmen and Senators. Many people, including scientists, journalists, Congressmen and Senators, have publicly expressed their doubts about the FBI’s conclusions. The FBI has presented no witnesses and no physical evidence to support its case against Dr. Ivins. More pertinent to the questions included here is that the FBI has never explained how it excluded other research labs as potential sources of the attack anthrax.
The CASE CLOSED blog has now obtained and published Dr. Ivins’ RMR-1029 inventory logs …
It is the intent of the CASE CLOSED blog to track down, to the extent possible, and to eliminate, to the extent possible, other potential sources of RMR-1029 anthrax which might have been diverted and modified for use in the 2001 attacks.
So … if you have answers to any of the questions above, I look forward to your responses.