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

Archive for July 10th, 2009

* the questions NAS needs to hear

Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 10, 2009

why the FBI failed to solve the 2001 anthrax caseCASE CLOSED

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

* VIDEO – introducing CASE CLOSED

***

the questions NAS needs to hear

***

Ellen Gilbert writes in Town Topics (Princeton – 7/8/09) … thanks to a CASE CLOSED blogger for sending me the article

  • In response to an October, 2008 request by the Federal Bureau of Investigation to review the scientific methods used by the Bureau during its investigation of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks, the National Academies (NAS) recently posted a statement describing the scope of the study.
  • The ad hoc committee will, according the NAS statement of scope, “evaluate the scientific foundation for the specific techniques used by the FBI to determine whether these techniques met appropriate standards for scientific reliability and for use in forensic validation and whether the FBI reached appropriate scientific conclusions from its use of these techniques.”
  • In an October 16 (2008) letter, Congressman Rush Holt (D-12) expressed concern that the questions posed in an earlier letter to the NAS from Vahid Majidi, assistant director of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate at the FBI, were “narrowly focused and do not truly test the FBI’s conclusions in the case.”
  • Mr. Holt went on to say that he hoped the NAS panel would “look at the full range of scientific evidence and the methods the FBI used to reach its scientific conclusions,” in order to “give the public the greatest possible confidence in the conclusions.”
  • Mr. Holt posed several of his own specific questions for the Academy’s consideration, should it choose to undertake the independent review.
    • whether any of the FBI’s scientific findings are inconsistent with the Bureau’s conclusions,
    • whether other scientific tests not carried out by the FBI might refute its conclusions,
    • and whether the FBI followed “all accepted evidence-gathering, chain of possession, and scientific analytical methods.”

Read the entire column at … http://www.towntopics.com/jul0809/story3.php

COMMENTS OF THE CASE CLOSED BLOG PARTICIPANT

Rush Holt has submitted questions to the same names at NAS Lew submitted them to. But, disappointing to a scientist, Holt’s questions are very general. The questions need to be very, very specific and backed up with references so that NAS cannot brush them under the carpet.

RELATED POSTS …

Members of the NAS Committee … https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/nas-announces-committee-to-review-fbis-anthrax-science/

Scientific questions sent to the NAS committee by the CASE CLOSED blog … https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/questions-to-nas-regarding-scientific-aspects-of-the-nas-review-of-fbi-science-used-in-investigating-the-2001-anthrax-attacks-questions-posed-by-case-closed-blog-participants/

Procedural questions sent to the NAS committee by the CASE CLOSED blog … https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2009/06/23/letter-to-nas-with-additional-questions-regarding-their-intended-review-of-science-issues-related-to-the-fbi-anthrax-investigation/

Advertisements

Posted in * anthrax science, * NAS review of FBI science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , , | 3 Comments »