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

Archive for July, 2009

* Adam Behsudi (FrederickNewsPost.com) … the CASE CLOSED blog keeps questioning the FBI’s anthrax case

Posted by DXer on July 26, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.

******

the CASE CLOSED blog keeps questioning the FBI’s anthrax case

******

Adam Behsudi wrote several stories about the anthrax case in today’s (7-26-09) FrederickNewsPost.com. The story excerpted below, headlined Anthrax Case: Amerithrax debate lives online, shows the important role our CASE CLOSED blog is continuing to play in raising relevant questions about the FBI’s anthrax investigation …

  • For the past year, government officials have remained quiet on the case accusing Fort Detrick scientist Bruce Ivins of the deadly anthrax letter attacks.
    • Not so on the Internet, where a handful of people have turned Amerithrax into an ongoing discussion.
    • … bloggers have been filing Freedom of Information Act requests and working sources just as any experienced reporter would.
  • “I think it’s kept it alive. Its provided a place for reporters and others to go from time to time and look for facts and opinions,” said Lew Weinstein, who wrote a fictional novel based on the Amerithrax case titled “CASE CLOSED.”
  • Weinstein said the facts, or what he perceives as a lack thereof, infuriated him to the point of writing CASE
    Lew Weinstein

    Lew Weinstein

    CLOSED. He maintains a blog with the same name, trying to debunk the FBI case against Ivins.

  • Weinstein, who splits his time between Key West, Fla., and Collioure, France, was once a congressional candidate, has degrees from Princeton and the Harvard Business School and retired in 2005 as the CEO of a biomedical research organization.
  • “I am amazed at the level of scientific discourse that’s taking place on my blog,” said Weinstein, who called from a trip he was taking with his wife to Lithuania. “This is not simply a crime story. There’s more to it than that,” he said.
  • Ed Lake has been studying the case since 2001. Eight years ago he started a website to compile facts, documents and his own analysis. Unlike Weinstein, Lake has found the FBI case against Ivins solid.
  • Despite opposing viewpoints, Lake and Weinstein share an interest in the Amerithrax case that goes beyond the curiosity of most people.

read the entire article at … http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=93061

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

* Adam Behsudi (FrederickNewsPost.com)… vital questions persist in the anthrax case

Posted by DXer on July 26, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.

******

vital questions persist in the anthrax case

******

Adam Behsudi wrote several stories in today’s (7-26-09) FrederickNewsPost.com, including one which highlights our CASE CLOSED blog.

read the entire article at … http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?storyID=93064

Posted in * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

* In addition to asking the Attorney General to act, Congressman Conyers should move Congressman Rush Holt’s bill to create an Anthrax Investigation Commission

Posted by DXer on July 26, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.


Rep. Conyers

Rep. Conyers

.

In addition to asking the Attorney General to act,

Congressman Conyers should move

Congressman Rush Holt’s bill

to create an Anthrax Investigation Commission

.

AP reports (7-24-09) …

  • The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee on Friday urged Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special counsel to examine potential abuses by former President Bush’s administration.
  • Rep.  John Conyers, D-Mich., said in a speech to the National Press Club that Holder ”must appoint a special counsel to review the Bush administration abuses of power and misconduct. A criminal probe — he’s got to do that.”
  • Conyers’ committee has sought an investigation of Bush administration moves criticized by Democrats, including its methods of interrogating foreign detainees, use of warrantless wiretaps, alleged retribution against critics, and allegations that officials intentionally misused intelligence.
  • He said the criminal probe should be accompanied by a ”9/11-type panel” to gather facts and make recommendations on preventing the misuse of power.
  • A Justice Department spokeswoman declined comment. Holder is considering whether to appoint a prosecutor to review the Bush administration’s methods of interrogating suspected terrorists.
  • President Obama has expressed reluctance to conduct a probe into alleged Bush-era abuses and resisted an effort by congressional Democrats to establish a ”truth commission,” saying the nation should be ”looking forward and not backwards.”

read the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/07/24/us/politics/AP-US-Democrats-Bush.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=conyers&st=cse

LMW COMMENT …

To Congressman Conyers’ list should be added the Anthrax Investigation Commission proposed by Congressman Rush Holt. The legislation which would create this Commission is currently held in Congressman Conyers’ own Judiciary Committee.

Why hasn’t Congressman Conyers advanced this legislation?

It is abundantly clear that the FBI’s case against Dr. Bruce Ivins is far from compelling, and it seems clear that Dr. Ivins could not have been the sole perpetrator of the anthrax attacks, if he was involved at all.

What is the FBI hiding?

Why did the FBI fail to solve the anthrax case?

Who benefitted from the failure to solve the case?

Who had the power to divert the FBI’s investigation?

I address these questions in my novel CASE CLOSED, which presents a fictional scenario to explain the FBI’s failure, a scenario which many readers find “all too plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

CASE CLOSED


Posted in * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

* USAMRIID RMR records – Dr. Bruce Ivins’ flask 1029 – two documents don’t match

Posted by DXer on July 25, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.

******

USAMRIID RMR records – Dr. Bruce Ivins’ flask 1029

two documents don’t match

******

I have now received new documents, from DXer, in addition to the previously redacted copy of the RMR-1029 records that I posted here (* Dr. Bruce Ivins RMR-1029 inventory records, from 1997 to 2003, pursuant to a FOIA request) on June 26.

One of the new documents is an unredacted copy of the above, showing names and locations of where aliquots of RMR-1029 were shipped to.

The other document is the ORIGINAL working document of 1997 when there was still 1000ml in the flask and no aliquots had yet been removed.

Curiously this ORIGINAL document is DIFFERENT than the other document. It gives a different location. The new RMR-1029 document has been altered. But by whom?

The New York Times partially reported some of these details previously:
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20080907/znyt02/809070303
Laboratory records obtained by The New York Times show that the anthrax supply labeled RMR-1029, which the F.B.I. linked to the attacks, was stored in 1997 not in Dr. Ivins’s laboratory, in Building 1425, but in the adjacent Building 1412. Former colleagues said that its storage in both buildings at different times from 1997 to 2001 might mean that the bureau’s estimate of 100 people with physical access to it was two or three times too low.” NYT.

But this new document fills in new details. Apparently the document has been altered with white-out. If Bruce Ivins did this why would he not just score out the old location and hand-write in the new location? Why would he seek to obscure the original location?

The location of the flask was vital to the FBI’s case against Ivins. The FBI claim the flask was in cold room B3 during the time of the attacks. But was it?

NEW DOCUMENT … p 1 of 2

USAMRIID RMRR - Bldg 1425 - p.1 of 2

NEW DOCUMENT … p 2 of 2

USAMRIID RMRR - Bldg 1425 - p.2 of 2

ORIGINAL DOCUMENT … p 1 of 1

USAMRIID RMRR - Bldg 1412 - p.1 of 1

Posted in * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , | 31 Comments »

* NAS anthrax committee will hold first meeting next Thursday and Friday

Posted by DXer on July 24, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.

*******

NAS anthrax committee will hold first meeting

next Thursday and Friday

*******

We’ll have a live audio webcast of open sessions.  Here’s a link to agenda:
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/meetingview.aspx?MeetingID=3658&MeetingNo=1

email from:

William Kearney
Deputy Executive Director &
Director of Media Relations
Office of News & Public Information
National Academy of Sciences

Meeting Information
Project Title: Review of the Scientific Approaches used During the FBI’s Investigation of the 2001 Bacillus Anthracis Mailings
PIN: BLSX-K-08-10-A   
Major Unit: Division on Earth and Life Studies
Policy and Global Affairs Division
Sub Unit: Board on Life Sciences
Committee on Science, Technology, and Law
RSO: Sharples, Fran
Subject/Focus Area:
Review of the Scientific Approaches used During the FBI’s Investigation of the 2001 Bacillus Anthracis Mailings
July 30, 2009 – July 31, 2009
National Academy of Sciences Building
2100 C St. NW
Washington D.C.
If you would like to attend the sessions of this meeting that are open
to the public or need more information please contact:
Contact Name: Amanda Cline
Email: acline@nas.edu
Phone: 202-334-3653
Fax: 202-334-1289

Agenda:

To register for this meeting, please go to:
http://www.surveygizmo.com/s/157438/first-meeting-of-the-committee-on-the-review-of-the-scientific-approaches-used-during-the-fbi-s-investigation-of-the-2001-bacillus-anthracis-mailings

Agenda

Thursday, July 30

Closed Session 7:30 -10:45

Open Session

10:45 Opening Remarks/Introductions/Ground rules
Alice Gast, Chair
David Relman, Vice-Chair

11:00 Charge to the Committee and Overview of the FBI Amerithax Case and the FBI’s Scientific Approaches
Chris Hassell, Assistant Director, Laboratory Division, FBI

11:45 Discussion

12:00 Open Session Adjourns

Closed Session 12:15-5:30

5:30 Adjourn

Friday, July 31

Open Session

8:00 Opening Remarks
Alice Gast, Chair
David Relman, Vice-Chair

8:20 Congressman Rush Holt

8:40 Discussion

9:00 Scientific Approach/Methodology/Analysis

Bruce Budowle, Executive Director, Center for Human Identification, Department of Forensic and Investigative Genetics, University of North Texas Health Science Center

Claire Fraser-Liggett, Director, Institute of Genome Sciences and Professor of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine

Jennifer Smith, BIOFOR Consulting

10:15 Discussion

11:00 Public Comments

12:00 Open Session Adjourns

Closed Session 12:00 – 4:00

4:00 Adjourn

Closed Session Summary Posted After the Meeting

Posted in * NAS review of FBI science | Tagged: , , , , | 3 Comments »

* there are so many ways to demonstrate that the FBI’s case against Dr. Bruce Ivins is simply not convincing

Posted by DXer on July 24, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

******

Here are the analyses previously posted as a comment on this blog by Beat Schaub.

Mr. Schaub reports … I studied molecular biology/biochemistry and recieved my PhD in Cell Biology. I’m a 5 times published author (4 can be easily found on PubMed, search for Beat E. Schaub, the 5th is in current protocols in cell biology). I’m currently doing training in Bio Safety/Security and Quality Assurance. Ah yes, I’m Swiss, 32 yo.

Access to RMR-1029:

  • Everybody at Ft. Detrick could have taken a sample before 1999 when it was transferred to a more secure location, up to then it was in an easily accessible place.
  • It was sent out to several laboratories at which point again a large number of persons (including cleaning personnel for all we know) could have taken 1 microliter to start a new culture.
  • Despite that, only one laboratory had RMR-1029/daughter thereof when the FBI collected samples indicating a less than perfect sample acquisition method. Due to the fact that a huge number had access to RMR-1029 it’s almost impossible to exclude everybody else.
  • Simply because nobody can have an air tight alibi for multiple days (As there is not a single defined timepoint when the letters have been sent but a 2/3 day long timeframe) unless he was in another country.
  • The alibi also loses importance if one is not preoccupied by the one culprit theory and includes the possibility of multiple culprits. It is entirely irrelevant who worked with RMR-1029 at the time of the attack since the attack spores where made of a daughter culture.

The Where (Overtime, Unsupervised Work, Bleachings):

  • While the location of the mailbox, the pre-stamped envelopes and RMR-1029 point in the general direction of Ft. Detrick we don’t know where exactly the attack spores were produced.
  • The only FORENSIC EVIDENCE we have is that the airfilters at Ft. Detrick did NOT show unusual high CFU counts (Dried spores would ultimately end up in the filtration system of the AC, as we know they get easily airborn) indicating that this is NOT WHERE the attack spores were produced.
  • That this is not preposterous claim is shown by the FBI’s Hatfill case as well as the claims by the FBI how easy such spores are produced.
  • In addition, this the B. subtilis found in the first attack was not found at Ft. Detrick. Finally, other personnel at Ft. Detrick claims that Ivins could not have done it. So:
    • Ivins overtime / unsupervised work is actually an alibi because we know he was not where the spores were produced.
    • Ivins secret bleaching, which he reported to a friend AND we only know of because Ivins told us; took place where the spores were NOT produced.
    • Since Ivins could bleach without anybody noticing we can assume any number of people could have done so, just they did not reveal it.

The When (Overtime, Unsupervised Work,  Bleachings):

  • There is no evidence for the timeline. But experience tells us that the refinement of the protocol observed by the difference of quality between the two attack waves CANNOT be achieved in three weeks, working only in evenings and in secrecy. I personally doubt that it can be achieved in three weeks working exclusively on this.
  • This makes his overtime / unsupervised work / bleaching irrelevant as we don’t know when the production has taken place.

The How (Equipment and Experience):

  • We don’t know how the spores were prepared therefore we can only guess whether Ivins had access to the necessary equipment.
  • However if the boasts of the FBI are true, no special equipment was required at all to produce the spores (Incubator, centrifuge etc. can be obtained easily), supporting the theory that the spores were not necessarily produced INSIDE of Ft. Detrick.
  • The how also could tell us about the expertise needed; what we know is that they did not work with dried spores at Ft. Detrick.
  • We also know that the wet growing of anthracis is well published and can be reproduced by anyone. Therefore anyone working on DRIED bacillus spores (e.g. Dugway people but also many other labs) should be considered more experienced when it comes to dried anthracis spore production.

The Alibi:

  • Sure Ivins has no conclusive Alibi for time when the letters were sent.
  • We DON’T HAVE: Ivins was at the place where the letters were sent, at the time they were sent.
  • We HAVE: Ivins cannot prove he was not there at that time.
  • Fortunately, you don’t have to prove your innocence; your guilt has to be proven.

The Silicon:

  • Low concentrations of silicon such as found in RMR-1030 are naturally occurring as claimed by the FBI and might be the result of the addition of silicon anti foaming agent.
  • None of the ~200 protocols tested by the FBI resulted in silicon concentrations as high as found in the attack spores clearly indicating that a very specific protocol was used which resulted in this.
    • Ivins would not have deviated from the well known and documented protocols.
    • The high silicon count cannot be the result of some obscure purification method because it did not add to the deadliness and therefore there is no reason to enrich it.

Dr. Ivins’ Mental Health:

  • If Ivins psyche was a problem, why was he allowed to work at Ft. Detrick?
  • And why did none of his colleagues notice/report it?
  • We should also not that he was in treatment /therapy all the time, so he was open and honest about his mental problem.

Driving a Distance to the Mailbox:

  • Well, that is the most obvious thing to do; everybody with half a brain would drive a couple of miles before placing the letters into the mailbox. It’s the most logical thing to do.

The Motive:

  • On the patents Ivins is only listed as provider of the spores and would as such not have profited much, leaving people with access to RMR-1029 AND much more direct interests.

Misleading the Investigators:

  • Ivins did not mislead the investigators:
    • Sample 1 was the wrong tube but sent in before official specifications (Wrong tube = obvious, the FBI also immediately realized that it was the wrong tube).
    • Sample 2, as sample 1, contained culture from RMR-1029 but first set of tests failed, only later the FBI realized this with two new tests (using the duplicate from Dr. Keim, which raises the questions what had happened to the sample they have gotten? Used up? Destroyed?).
  • The error is not with Ivins but with the FBI.
    • Obviously others misled the FBI because only one sample containing RMR-1029 or derivate was recovered from outside Ft. Detrick even though it was sent out multiple times to multiple institutions.
    • Alternatively, the test of the FBI is not so reliable and they did not repeat it with the new methods on all samples.
  • Dr. Ivins also admitted to the bleaching, something we wouldn’t know without him generally indicating that he did not try to mislead the FBI.

Posted in * anthrax science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , | 9 Comments »

* a plea to President Obama … make the FBI come clean about its failed anthrax investigation

Posted by DXer on July 24, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.

******

a plea to President Obama

… make the FBI come clean about its failed anthrax investigation

******

DXer, in his latest comment, raises serious and pertinent questions concerning the integrity of anthrax samples which are critical to the FBI’s conclusion that Dr. Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the attacks. DXer asks …

  • Was there adequate security?
  • Did unauthorized personnel have access to the samples?
  • Was there adequate accountability (i.e., chain-of-custody, evidence storage, evidence in-processing).
  • Who tested the sample that is claimed to have been a false sample submitted by Dr. Ivins?
  • Who chose to destroy the sample submitted using a different protocol.

DXer adds that former FBI Counterterrorism Chief Ben Furman wrote to him to say that Amerithrax was a mess but that he thought most information should be kept from the public.

DXer disagrees … so do I.

LMW COMMENT …

DXer’s questions, which are related to a recent interchange on the CASE CLOSED blog between Bugmaster and Ed Lake, go to the core of what appears to be the FBI’s clumsy cover-up of its failed anthrax investigation.

  • The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is, on its face, inadequate.
  • Senator Arlen Specter, among many others, has given his opinion as a former prosecutor that the FBI could never get a conviction on the basis of the evidence they have so far made public.

There must be something that makes the FBI delay and hide and continue to make itself look foolish …

  • The FBI is not incompetent; they must know that the case they have presented makes no sense.
  • It is not unreasonable to conclude that the FBI purposely accused a dead man in a press conference in order to avoid the necessity of a trial where evidence would be presented under oath and judged by a jury.
  • It is obvious that the FBI is refusing to tell the Congress and the American people what it knows about this case of mass murder and terrorism.
  • This may be the reason why it has still not “closed the case,” which would make its evidence (or lack thereof) subject to FOIA requests.

In my opinion, the FBI’s behavior, which is the core of the problem, is not rational UNLESS they are under orders to keep Congress and the public from knowing what really happened.

Which comes back to the two questions I raise in my novel CASE CLOSED …

Who benefitted from keeping the anthrax case unsolved?

Who had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

In CASE CLOSED, I develop a fictional scenario to answer those questions, and the corruption of the FBI investigation in my story goes to the highest levels of the American government.

  • Do I think the story I portrayed in CASE CLOSED is what really happened?
  • I don’t make that claim. I have no way to know. I made up the story presented in CASE CLOSED, with no access to secret witnesses or documents.
  • But I do believe that something like what I portrayed did happen. It’s the only reason I can think of to explain the FBI’s otherwise bizarre behavior.
  • And many of the readers of CASE CLOSED find my story disturbingly plausible.

It seems to me, and to many others, that the FBI is hiding some terrible dark secrets.

We need Rush Holt’s Anthrax Investigation Commission to get out of the House Judiciary Committee and into action.

But I think we need more.

Who has the power to make the FBI tell the truth?

  • We need our new President, who I worked hard for and continue to support, and who I believe to be intelligent, thoughtful, courageous and well motivated, to step away from his reluctance to hold the Bush administration accountable for its many heinous misdeeds.
  • So I call upon President Obama, among his many daunting challenges, to demand that the FBI come clean about its anthrax investigation.
  • The integrity of the American government has been challenged by the FBI’s failed investigation and cover-up of the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Mr. President, please do what is needed to restore the integrity and pride in America which has been so wrongly debased by your predecessor.

Our country needs to know.

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

* Hunting the Anthrax Killer … new National Geographic video promoting Sunday show

Posted by DXer on July 22, 2009

.CASE CLOSED

why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?

CASE CLOSED offers a “fictional” answer

* buy CASE CLOSED

.

.

Hunting the Anthrax Killer

National Geographic Channel

Sunday 9:00 pm

********

click here for video …

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/hunting-the-anthrax-killer-4437/Overview#tab-Videos/06982_00

Posted in * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 7 Comments »

* It wasn’t Ivins. So why does the FBI say it was Ivins? And WHY did the FBI fail to solve the case?

Posted by DXer on July 22, 2009

.CASE CLOSED

why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?

CASE CLOSED offers a “fictional” answer

* buy CASE CLOSED

.

LMW COMMENT …

A comment to the CASE CLOSED blog earlier today included the analyses reproduced below.

  • I urge you to read through these points carefully.
  • As you read, I think it will become abundantly clear to you that the FBI case against Dr. Ivins is a fraud
  • The FBI has not proven that Dr. Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks.

But the really important questions have to do with why the FBI failed to solve the case.

  • I personally don’t think the FBI is incompetent.
  • I think it is unreasonable to believe the FBI could spend seven years, hundreds of thousands of man hours, and millions of dollars in the largest investigation in the history of the FBI and come up with so little.
  • I think the FBI knows that Dr. Ivins is not the sole perpetrator.

Isn’t that frightening? If I’m right, the FBI has accused a dead man who can’t defend himself  based on a case that on its face is laughable.

Why? … The truth is we don’t know why.

In my novel CASE CLOSED I present a fictional scenario that shows …

… the FBI didn’t solve the anthrax case because they were told not to solve it.

Which leads to two other questions.

… who benefitted from not solving the case?
… who had the power to divert the FBI investigation for seven years?

Again, we don’t know the answers to those questions.

In CASE CLOSED, my fictional story line is that the President and Vice President of the United States, in order to add another plank to their bundle of lies supporting their war of choice in Iraq, wanted the FBI not to solve the case so they could continue, as Colin Powell actually did at the United Nations, to raise the specter that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons and the means to deliver them to the U.S., which of course was nonsense.

Is the CASE CLOSED hypothesis true?  …  I don’t know.

Does it sound like it might be true?  …  Sure does, as many of the readers of CASE CLOSED have said.

We need to know the truth!

We need Rush Holt’s proposed Anthrax Investigation Commission to become a reality.

  • Somebody – not Dr. Bruce Ivins – unleashed a murderous attack against America, and the organizers and perpetrators of that attack are still at large.
  • And there’s a reason the FBI failed to solve the anthrax case.
  • Knowing that reason is even more important than knowing the names of the actual perpetrators.

I urge you to read CASE CLOSED.  …  Not because it answers these questions, but because it asks them.

America must ask these questions.

Our government owes us answers to these questions.

* buy CASE CLOSED

CASE CLOSED

******

Here are the analyses previously posted as a comment on this blog …

Access to RMR-1029:

  • Everybody at Ft. Detrick could have taken a sample before 1999 when it was transferred to a more secure location, up to then it was in an easily accessible place.
  • It was sent out to several laboratories at which point again a large number of persons (including cleaning personnel for all we know) could have taken 1 microliter to start a new culture.
  • Despite that, only one laboratory had RMR-1029/daughter thereof when the FBI collected samples indicating a less than perfect sample acquisition method. Due to the fact that a huge number had access to RMR-1029 it’s almost impossible to exclude everybody else.
  • Simply because nobody can have an air tight alibi for multiple days (As there is not a single defined timepoint when the letters have been sent but a 2/3 day long timeframe) unless he was in another country.
  • The alibi also loses importance if one is not preoccupied by the one culprit theory and includes the possibility of multiple culprits. It is entirely irrelevant who worked with RMR-1029 at the time of the attack since the attack spores where made of a daughter culture.

The Where (Overtime, Unsupervised Work, Bleachings):

  • While the location of the mailbox, the pre-stamped envelopes and RMR-1029 point in the general direction of Ft. Detrick we don’t know where exactly the attack spores were produced.
  • The only FORENSIC EVIDENCE we have is that the airfilters at Ft. Detrick did NOT show unusual high CFU counts (Dried spores would ultimately end up in the filtration system of the AC, as we know they get easily airborn) indicating that this is NOT WHERE the attack spores were produced.
  • That this is not preposterous claim is shown by the FBI’s Hatfill case as well as the claims by the FBI how easy such spores are produced.
  • In addition, this the B. subtilis found in the first attack was not found at Ft. Detrick. Finally, other personnel at Ft. Detrick claims that Ivins could not have done it. So:
    • Ivins overtime / unsupervised work is actually an alibi because we know he was not where the spores were produced.
    • Ivins secret bleaching, which he reported to a friend AND we only know of because Ivins told us; took place where the spores were NOT produced.
    • Since Ivins could bleach without anybody noticing we can assume any number of people could have done so, just they did not reveal it.

The When (Overtime, Unsupervised Work,  Bleachings):

  • There is no evidence for the timeline. But experience tells us that the refinement of the protocol observed by the difference of quality between the two attack waves CANNOT be achieved in three weeks, working only in evenings and in secrecy. I personally doubt that it can be achieved in three weeks working exclusively on this.
  • This makes his overtime / unsupervised work / bleaching irrelevant as we don’t know when the production has taken place.

The How (Equipment and Experience):

  • We don’t know how the spores were prepared therefore we can only guess whether Ivins had access to the necessary equipment.
  • However if the boasts of the FBI are true, no special equipment was required at all to produce the spores (Incubator, centrifuge etc. can be obtained easily), supporting the theory that the spores were not necessarily produced INSIDE of Ft. Detrick.
  • The how also could tell us about the expertise needed; what we know is that they did not work with dried spores at Ft. Detrick.
  • We also know that the wet growing of anthracis is well published and can be reproduced by anyone. Therefore anyone working on DRIED bacillus spores (e.g. Dugway people but also many other labs) should be considered more experienced when it comes to dried anthracis spore production.

The Alibi:

  • Sure Ivins has no conclusive Alibi for time when the letters were sent.
  • We DON’T HAVE: Ivins was at the place where the letters were sent, at the time they were sent.
  • We HAVE: Ivins cannot prove he was not there at that time.
  • Fortunately, you don’t have to prove your innocence; your guilt has to be proven.

The Silicon:

  • Low concentrations of silicon such as found in RMR-1030 are naturally occurring as claimed by the FBI and might be the result of the addition of silicon anti foaming agent.
  • None of the ~200 protocols tested by the FBI resulted in silicon concentrations as high as found in the attack spores clearly indicating that a very specific protocol was used which resulted in this.
    • Ivins would not have deviated from the well known and documented protocols.
    • The high silicon count cannot be the result of some obscure purification method because it did not add to the deadliness and therefore there is no reason to enrich it.

Dr. Ivins’ Mental Health:

  • If Ivins psyche was a problem, why was he allowed to work at Ft. Detrick?
  • And why did none of his colleagues notice/report it?
  • We should also not that he was in treatment /therapy all the time, so he was open and honest about his mental problem.

Driving a Distance to the Mailbox:

  • Well, that is the most obvious thing to do; everybody with half a brain would drive a couple of miles before placing the letters into the mailbox. It’s the most logical thing to do.

The Motive:

  • On the patents Ivins is only listed as provider of the spores and would as such not have profited much, leaving people with access to RMR-1029 AND much more direct interests.

Misleading the Investigators:

  • Ivins did not mislead the investigators:
    • Sample 1 was the wrong tube but sent in before official specifications (Wrong tube = obvious, the FBI also immediately realized that it was the wrong tube).
    • Sample 2, as sample 1, contained culture from RMR-1029 but first set of tests failed, only later the FBI realized this with two new tests (using the duplicate from Dr. Keim, which raises the questions what had happened to the sample they have gotten? Used up? Destroyed?).
  • The error is not with Ivins but with the FBI.
    • Obviously others misled the FBI because only one sample containing RMR-1029 or derivate was recovered from outside Ft. Detrick even though it was sent out multiple times to multiple institutions.
    • Alternatively, the test of the FBI is not so reliable and they did not repeat it with the new methods on all samples.
  • Dr. Ivins also admitted to the bleaching, something we wouldn’t know without him generally indicating that he did not try to mislead the FBI.

Posted in * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

* Hunting the Anthrax Killer … National Geographic Channel … Sunday, July 26, 9:00pm

Posted by DXer on July 22, 2009

to learn more about Lew Weinstein and his novels,

 go to … http://lewweinsteinauthorblog.com/

******

Hunting the Anthrax Killer


National Geographic Channel

Sunday, July 26, 9:00pm

It is the worst biological attack in modern American history, and it occurs just three weeks after 9-11. An anonymous killer mails deadly anthrax to the media and members of Congress. When it is over, five people are dead, 17 others are sickened and many fear the worst: Al Qaeda has struck again. It takes the FBI seven years, but in 2008 it makes the dramatic announcement that its agents have found the anthrax mailer. The accused is not a terrorist, but a U.S. government scientist, Dr. Bruce E. Ivins. But Ivins can never be charged: he committed suicide just days before the FBI’s announcement. Now many of his colleagues insist the FBI has got it wrong. Ivins was not a killer, they say. Is Bruce Ivins a murderer, responsible for the deaths of five people? Or is he a scapegoat in a case that will never be solved?

See an introductory video at … http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/hunting-the-anthrax-killer-4437/Overview#tab-Videos/06982_00

LMW COMMENT …

I wrote CASE CLOSED and started this blog because I believe that the FBI’s announcement in August 2008 that Dr. Bruce Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks is an unsustainable conclusion, based on the facts which the FBI has cited and made known.

The people at National Geographic have taken a deep look at the case and those who follow this blog are anxiously awaiting their conclusions.

  • Will the National Geographic special advance what we know about the anthrax case and the FBI’s investigation?
  • Will it nourish the doubts and skepticism expressed by so many on this CASE CLOSED blog?
  • Or will National Geographic conclude that the FBI has indeed solved the case?
  • We’ll all find out on Sunday.

******

What does a novel have to do with the real anthrax case?

******

The readers and contributors to the CASE CLOSED blog do not believe the anthrax case will forever remain unsolved. Together …

  • we are advocating for Congressman Rush Hold’s Anthrax Investigation Commission,
  • we are framing questions for the NAS to consider in their upcoming review of the FBI’s anthrax science,
  • and we take every opportunity to spread “reasonable doubt” about the FBI’s case against Dr. Bruce Ivins.

As we move inexorably toward a refutation of the FBI’s assertion that Dr. Bruce Ivins is the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks, questions must arise:

  • WHY … did the FBI put forward such an unsupportable conclusion?
  • WHY … did the FBI fail to solve the case?
  • WHO … stood to benefit from the FBI’s failure to solve the case?
  • WHO … had the power to force the FBI to mount a monumental investigation directed away from the truth?

In writing CASE CLOSED, I drew on my author’s imagination to create fictional answers to these serious questions. But readers of my novel see something more than just fiction.

What I have written in CASE CLOSED may not be real, but it could be “true,” in the sense that much historical fiction is actually “truer” than the bare historical facts.

******

Reader comments about CASE CLOSED

posted on amazon.com

http://www.amazon.com/Case-Closed-Lewis-M-Weinstein/product-reviews/1595943188/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

******

  • Is it really fiction? … The author states loud and clear that this book is fiction. But, anyone who has witnessed the last eight years of American history sees great similarities in the underhanded way the last Administration dealt with issues and the way this “fictional” Administration worked. I never have given much credence to conspiracy theories but the investigation of the Anthrax attacks makes one stop and really think about it.
  • Weinstein raises some very interesting and disturbing theories. If it was not meant to make one think about the real situation, the book would still be a great read. It is suspenseful and a real page turner. Please tell me it’s not true!
  • An action/thriller that makes you think … The writing is sparse, driven by a plausible plot that allows the reader to think through the crime/mystery along with the protagonist. Despite the troubling reality of the subject matter, it is a thoroughly enjoyable and illuminating read.
  • Responsible Americans who believe in holding our government accountable for its actions should read Case Closed to be more informed of the facts of the case, regardless of whether they come to agree with the author’s theory. More investigation is needed.


Posted in * anthrax science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , | 7 Comments »