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

Archive for February 21st, 2010

* it is utterly naive, and dangerous to our country, to simply accept the FBI’s unproven assertion that Dr. Bruce Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax murders … if he was involved at all

Posted by DXer on February 21, 2010

CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

is a novel which answers the question …

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

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

it is utterly naive, and dangerous to our country,

to simply accept the FBI’s unproven assertion

that Dr. Bruce Ivins was the sole perpetrator

of the 2001 anthrax murders

… if he was involved at all

******

The following comment appeared at … http://www.cioediting.com/wordpress/index.php/anthrax-attack/

Dr. Bruce Ivins

The lead article in today’s New York Times is titled, “After Eight Years, F.B.I. Shuts Book on Anthrax Case.” It describes the 2001 case, shortly after 9/11, when letters filled with anthrax were sent to two U.S. Senators and news organizations. The letters infected 22 people and killed five. They led to evacuations of Congress and the Supreme Court and resulted in increased spending on biodefense.

Dr. Bruce Ivins, who was an army biodefense expert, was a prime suspect when he killed himself. The F.B.I. later assigned sole blame to him based on DNA evidence on a flask in his lab, an analysis of his emails and his presence alone in an anthrax lab late at night.

While some felt he was incapable of such acts, and the case was called circumstantial at best, the investigation is now closed.

It’s easy to forget what things were like at that time, when we didn’t know if another Al Qaeda attack was imminent, and many felt it might involve a chemical or biological agent released into the atmosphere. The anthrax letters caused widespread panic despite their limited effect, and copycats sent talcum powder through the mail as a prank.

At least now, we can look back with some perspective on the situation, and thankfully, Al Qaeda has not adopted any of the methods reportedly used by Dr. Ivins.

LMW COMMENT …

It is utterly naïve to believe the FBI in the face of the absence of any convincing case against Dr. Ivins, although it is just such naiveté that the FBI must be relying upon as it persists in its unsupported story. It is important to know who committed the anthrax murders and why the FBI is withholding that information, if they have it.

Here’s what the FBI is still not addressing …

  • there is no physical evidence linking Dr. Ivins to the murders
  • there are no witnesses linking Dr. Ivins to the preparation or mailing of the attack anthrax
  • the timeline the FBI has proposed, for Ivins preparing the anthrax or going to Princeton to mail the letters, is impossible
  • the DNA science, at best, links Dr. Ivins to a beaker to which 350 other scientists may have had access

******

******

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 16 Comments »

* Old Atlantic in response to Jim White

Posted by DXer on February 21, 2010

CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

is a novel which answers the question …

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

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

from Old Atlantic in response to Jim White …

see related post … * Jim White believes a 100-fold math error in the Amerithrax investigation improperly excluded suspects … do you agree?

Just to answer the original question.  The letter anthrax contained subtilis not in RMR-1029 and contained silicon not in RMR-1029.  That proves the letter anthrax was not directly from RMR-1029 but regrown.

The letters had 5+ grams in the first set and 2+ grams in the second set although there are those who sometimes argue over this.  The FBI should clarify what info it has.

Production of Bacillus Spores as a Simulant for Biological Warfare Agents
Authors: Laurie F. Carey; Diane C. St. Amant; Mark A. Guelta; EDGEWOOD CHEMICAL BIOLOGICAL CENTER ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD

These people actually grew grams and grams of subtilis spores.  They started out with empty plates and empty liter flasks, put growth media in them and put subtilis in them and actually grew bacteria and then turned them into spores and measure the weight they got.  They checked the growth media every 24 hours and did experiments every 24 hours on them to test how far along they were.

They used the New Brunswick C-25 floor shaker incubator unit to grow grams of subtilis in liquid media.  They used the necessary square feet of plates to grow on plates and get grams and grams of spores after centrifuging and drying.

This had to happen because the anthrax in the letters contained subtilis and silicon not in RMR-1029.

To get 5 grams of dry spores you have to start with a large amount of growth media, somewhere from 5 liters to 25 liters or even 50 liters.  Using twice as much bacteria to start can shorten the growth time by one generation’s growth time, but it doesn’t change the amount of growth media you need.  The amount of growth media, how many liters, is determined by how much bacteria you end up with not how much you start with.

The people who actually grew grams of bacteria report it took large scale equipment that doesn’t fit into Ivins’ glove box.  You can see the picture of the C-25 New Brunswick 400 pound floor shaker incubator.  Its bigger than a man.  Centrifuges to do the job are also large, I posted links to them at Meryl Nass in 2008.

It is not a matter of some notation in Ivins’ notebook suddenly changes everything.  The Laura Carey et al people actually grew the grams and grams of powder that are the equivalent of what is in the letters.  The second letters are reported as 99 percent pure in the recent FBI report.  So they are stuck with that.  Even one gram takes 3 to 14 days according to Carey et al, and that is using the C-25 400 pound floor incubator shaker and liquid media.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »