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

* from DXer … why is there a 100 ml discrepancy in Dr. Ivins RMR-1029 records?

Posted by DXer on February 25, 2010

CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

is the novel which answers the question …

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

check out reader comments at amazon.com

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

from DXer …

why is there a 100 ml discrepancy

in Dr. Ivins RMR-1029 records?

******

Advertisements

23 Responses to “* from DXer … why is there a 100 ml discrepancy in Dr. Ivins RMR-1029 records?”

  1. Zicon said

    My strong opinion behind the reasons why USAMRIID did not disclose the supposedly missing substances, was to not create a scare or panic in the immediate area/publicly surrounding USAMRIID, therefore was not publicly announced..

    One thing people need to realize, is just because you don’t hear about it in the news or papers doesn’t mean it didn’t happen or it isn’t fact.
    The bigger question to look at, is why wasn’t the public notified? To raise awareness even at the very least?, Even if it was just a paperwork error… Which “It was…”

    There are many important questions that arise to me in the missing 100 mls of anthrax for instance:

    ******************************************************************************************
    Is it likely that the Original 1000 ml flask was never shipped to USAMRIID, and it was only an “exact quantity of only 900 ml.?“ Now if the shipper/Handlers/owners of the flask (and who all were involved in the making/handling of the flask) would have found out upon arrival of the liquid and it was measured by more than one person at the time of receiving it within a short timeframe, and the 100mls were noted right then and there, then we get into a whole other huge problem from the place that sent the flask to USAMRIID.. I’d be firing people left and right if that was the case due to what it was (BSL-3) Anthrax, but this was not done, therefore just a minor but major oversight on USAMRIID’s part but more so on Ivins part due to Ivins being one of the main researchers on anthrax but due to taking everything into account, aside from looking at the flask itself and asking the following questions. That should be very carefully/diligently looked into!
    ******************************************************************************************
    Now.. If more than one person can account for the receiving and taking exact measurements of the dirty tar water like looking anthrax liquid upon arrival/within a reasonable timeframe upon receipt, then that gives a more solid basis to things of wrong doing that “could have” taken place at USAMRIID.. But is highly unlikely…

    *****Unless someone was able to obtain the “supposedly missing” (Note 7) 100mls that made its way to the 3rd location that would have been at “””SRI”””””/CIA”””””””/Advanced Bio & perhaps ties with the Shawmark group/DPC Tech./ Hadron/Analex/University on the east coast

    *****A.) Did the flask that contained the anthrax RMR-1029 have specific certified calibrated or permanent measurement markings that could identify the exact amount in increments on 50 or 100 mls all the way to 1000 mls mark???
    If not, then 100 mls could have very well gone undetected by anyone that has all the stress and responsibilities as Bruce had or anyone else for that matter that works with substances of this nature.

    ***** We need to very closely look at protocol procedures that are supposed to be strictly enforced by the US Army (USAMRIID)

    1a.) When the initial flask was sent to USAMRIID, how was it received from the very beginning?
    *a.) Who all were involved from the hand-off of the flask to checking the exact amount then having others to verify the accuracy of the delivery on to labeling the container and placing it in the cold storage or refrigerated room until proper placement was determined by the lead scientist or team in-charge of the flask?… Or was it just eye-balled, and said yeah it looks close enough and its in a 1000 ml flask and everyone was done with things? Therefore would have gone undetected and anything could have been assumed by anyone later on down the road as what I’m sticking to…
    *b.) Surely more than one person would have to check the accuracy and sign-off on the flask upon receiving it from it’s makers/shippers location?…
    1b.) How many people check in & verify exactly what is being received based on what is actually being sent to whom, and for what purposes that also arises the questions of:

    1c.)Who was the person or “persons” responsible in making sure that what was checked in, that it was 110% accurate? And it is what is really is supposed to be…

    1d.)Protocol procedures. Based on what is being received, does the item(s) in question require more than one person to sign off on the accuracy of said items? Common sense tells you yes.. But was that done?

    1e.)How many people were involved in the shipping/receiving from “”””SRI“”””,CIA””””” DARPA, DUGWAY, BATTEL, etc. to & from point A to point B? Who all signed off on the flask?
    Also one needs to did very deep into the logistics of everything and who all is/was involved!!!

    Did they actually even check it physically or just take someone else’s word for it? (As can often happen in many applications anywhere)

    1f.)There are many people who work for USAMRIID of all likes that want to speak out but (Everyone from anyone down to the one who cleans the floors has been silenced/forbidden to speak openly about their known opinions or known facts that can help this whole mess out and prove once and for all Innocence or Guilt dealing with Dr. Bruce Ivins.

    1g.)The buildings in question would have a physical log book of entery/exit getting into areas along with the known electronic log that anyone could forge at anytime unknowingly “very easy“… Due to the secondary badges that are always kept on base at all times, and not allowed to be taken off base at all.

    2a*.) Did the FBI already have a plan based on known Intel that makes Hatfil “OFF LIMITS” for specific reasons due to a highly classified dual studies with medical/bio-weapons with “””””SRI/CIA””””””” and Pentagon/DOD/(SAIC) Science Applications International Corporation/ (NSWC) Naval Surface Warfare Center/( AECBC ) Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center???????????????????????
    (#7) I still have not personally ruled S. Hatfil out based on my own opinions, based on what he “really” probably personally knows, but isn’t saying to anyone since he was (what I think was done that he was paid off, and it wasn’t a settlement”)therefore legally deemed untouchable (In my opinion so he thinks…)

    3a.)If USAMRIID was billed for 1000 mls and only shipped 900mls, then does that not make the responsibility fall on the lab that produced the original flask of Ames? Was the missing 100mls ever even produced? If so where did that 100 mls go to? Was it sent to “””SRI/CIA”””” or for overseas, or to someone who has (DI) Diplomatic Immunity, then hoped on a privately charted or owned jet and flew back to where ever outside of the united states or a nice rural place in Virginia…

    4a.)***Has anyone checked the privately chartered planes that are owned by front companies here in the us that “really” ties to the us government but they use this to avoid accountability if anything goes wrong? This would take quite awhile to research, but even today is still being worked on, via flight manifest list, owners of certain airliners etc etc… During the important conferences that take place where scientist come together from all over the world.. Especially in England (Porton .D) or here in the us..

    5a.)I strongly believe Bruce Ivins is innocent and I’m going to do my very best at helping/proving it and show any all methods/information/opinions/or anything that magically appears that takes the FBI/DOJ speculations down to wishful thinking.

    Also how un-secure the us government really is from the lowest to the highest point.

    5b.) Anything worth noting that is good or bad, big or small with more emphasis in showing where corruption is at to only show the truth , but so many people can pick apart a mole hill and turn it into a mountain. When all some people want to do is open others eyes or make sure the right information gets to the right people and make sure those responsible for crimes that are of severe nature which is mostly big corporations and governments to make sure they are “held accountable” for their actions and not go unpunished for deaths of innocent people to multi million dollar crimes.

    [5c.)(EXAMPLE ONLY!) An example of the slack security, that anyone could get on a plane, train, or any automobile and fly, or ride all over the US right now with weaponized anthrax or biological agents, and it go undetected, and it could be released at anytime, the saddest thing is, (NO ONE WOULD EVER KNOW) So how secure and proactive is the us government really????… I would hope that the government is actually on top of things…. But also one runs into the possibilities of abusing peoples civil rights, and where that fine line is on assault or sexual assault, ( TSA ) etc. etc. to be able to detect any and all agents without touching anyone or abusing anyone’s civil/constitutional rights which is what’s being worked on until the equipment can be made on a cost efficient level, & mass produced for distribution across the country. And anyone that has the job to come up with how criminals act/react that wants to make sure people are/stay safe should be thinking so far outside of the box to make sure that everyone does stay safe, by any legal means necessary.]

    [(Only opinion for now) (That I’m very strongly sticking to) Knowledge is power, especially if (lets say anyone) has some serious dirt on some one or some thing and it is known, then man do they get really pissed off…, and usually more than 50% of the time do break laws in-order to find out what you know or have, such as now XE formally Blackwater that has been known to do the exact same dirty work for the Pentagon/CIA & to keep them out of “hot water” with Congress/Senate/(SIOC) or getting charged with a crime and going to prison. Which adds more fuel to the fire as to why E.P. stepped down as CEO to get out from assuming responsibility for later “SELECT” ops that tie to the pentagon with people who’s initials are D.R. (just because the pentagon where the oh so very important information was destroyed that D.R.or G.B. couldn’t account for thereafter, doesn’t mean someone couldn’t acquire Intel from the servers that housed the info that where millions of unaccounted money/extremely classified internal/external government/contractors of operations was supposedly at, and along with possible anthrax Intel and some ex-senators/affiliates who are members of the (SMOM) Sovereign Military Order of Malta/other “Select” groups & other very damaging information that has no paper trail at all…]

    Bottom line in my strong opinion is this was a minor mistake that Bruce Ivins made, and was eventually known to someone within our government, and then used for reasons that are not known (yet) to the public and ultimately used against Ivins, (which I believe is where other people come into play) because that oversight ended up destroying his life and ended in Ivins death. Someone saw this minor oversight as a motive for gains and a way out if anything went wrong, or a dark test was performed for gains that would include everything from getting documented case research that no one could ever knowingly do which was the mailings of anthrax and dealing with medical accounts/grants/money/stocks/bonds/orders for manufacturing of anything from toothpicks/medical equipment to top secret military/medical/bio-war/defense items etc. etc. etc.

    • BugMaster said

      “Did the flask that contained the anthrax RMR-1029 have specific certified calibrated or permanent measurement markings that could identify the exact amount in increments on 50 or 100 mls all the way to 1000 mls mark???”

      No. Flask such as these (a flask similar to an erlenmeyer, but not quite, the exact term for the somewhat antiquated flask used escapes me) may have rough reference marks at 100 pr 250 ml increments, but these are for approximation only.

      In otherwords, it was not marked with the intention to use it in a manner similar to a graduated cylinder.

      • Zicon said

        I gottcha.. One would figure that given what was being sent would be sent in some type of vial/flask that had legal markings on it that could be verified by a visiual reference when checking for the right amount shipped or receieved.. But since it wasn’t.. as opppsed to a Grad/cylinder then that gets into this which is extremely important at least to me of what I got into previously.

        Zicon said
        April 16, 2011 at 6:03 pm
        1a.) When the initial flask was sent to USAMRIID, How was it received from the very beginning?
        *a.) Who all were involved from the hand-off of the flask to checking the exact amount then having others to verify the accuracy of the delivery on to labeling the container and placing it in the cold storage or refrigerated room until proper placement was determined by the lead scientist or team in-charge of the flask?… Or was it just eye-balled, and said yeah it looks close enough and its in a 1000 ml flask and everyone was done with things? Therefore would have gone undetected and anything could have been assumed by anyone later on down the road as what I’m sticking to…
        *b.) Surely more than one person would have to check the accuracy and sign-off on the flask upon receiving it from it’s makers/shippers location?…
        1b.) How many people check in & verify exactly what is being received based on what is actually being sent to whom, and for what purposes that also arises the questions of:

        1c.)Who was the person or “persons” responsible in making sure that what was checked in, that it was 110% accurate? And it is what is really is supposed to be…

        1d.)Protocol procedures. Based on what is being received, does the item(s) in question require more than one person to sign off on the accuracy of said items? Common sense tells you yes.. But was that done?

        • DXer said

          As I recall Dr. Ivins 302 interview, which is online, it was sent on varying dates in mason jars. 7, I think. 6 were combined into the two 500 ml Ehrlenmeyer flasks (you have seen one pictured; one was used up a long time ago). The 7th shipment from Dugway, Dr. Ivins says, was not up to snuff and he set it aside for autoclaving. He did not have a specific recollection that it was autoclaved. Certainly, if there was not documentation, that is extremely notable and it should be a top governmental priority to try to track down the 7th mason jar sent from Dugway. It may not even have been purified by Renocal (after one or two attempts). And so the 7th shipment from Dugway, which was NOT put into the flask is of keen interest given that no traces of renocal were detected.

          When does Dr. Ivins say it was to be autoclaved? What date? I have FOIAed autoclave records from USMRC but more importantly FOIAed all of Lab Notebook 4010 and 3 years worth of all of Dr. Ivins’ numerous other notebooks. But I FOIAed from USMRC all of the notebooks that he provided to the FBI at one point. (I would have to compare the list to those subpoenaed by the grand jury).

          Some reporter should FOIA his notebooks from the FBI. USMRC says that they don’t have them (that the FBI took them) but JAG is trying to figure out how to get them. Searching this website for *** list of notebooks **** might turn up the long list.

  2. Old Atlantic said

    Zicon’s comment indicates building passes and a log? So Buildings 1412 and 1425 had logs? These logs for these dates are available for FOIA?

    So one can see when Ivins and others who checked mice/animals at either or both buildings went in and out?

    FOIA of these logs could help resolve which building had the mice/animal experiments, since the logs will show entry/exit of Ivins and others.

    Did Ivins go to both buildings 1412 and 1425 on any of these nights he had an animal check on his calendar?
    FOIA of these logs would help determine that.

    • DXer said

      Old Atlantic,

      I recommend you FOIA the building access logs from Building 1412 and Building 1425 from the FBI on the dates you specify. It is a free and simple process. I recommend you specify a relatively narrow range of dates — say, September and October 2001 (and if you insist August 2001). You are entitled to 2 free hours of search. You should request a fee waiver given the public interest in the matter and the fact that you plan on immediately distributing the matter. On the form or in the email, you can explain that if the FBI is incorrect in its understanding of events, it may be a matter of life and death in the sense that the anthrax killer is still out there (as Congressman Holt has noted).
      The reason to spread the requests around is because otherwise you may be deemed to use your 2 free hours of sesarch up upon cumulative requests (if other waiver grounds are deemed not to apply). It would be best if reporters submitted such requests, given they satisfy the criteria of being in the business of regularly distributing such information.

      • DXer said

        Upon reflection, I think you should narrow the request to September 11 to October 9 given that such log sheets may be voluminous with up to 377 or whatever employees entering the buildings.

      • Old Atlantic said

        Not promising, but what are the contact details?

    • DXer said

      http://www.fbi.gov/foia/requesting-fbi-records

    • Zicon said

      Logs/Passes… Think about it this way…

      Id/Pass #1 = To gain lawful entry into the base Period! Nothing else nothing more (Minus as an PhotoID card)

      Different Levels of gained entry/access to bio-areas/classified/restricted areas explained.

      Secondary passes/badges Must be received at the area that you are working at to allow further entry in specified areas that have been determined by your supervisor/work privilege’s deemed by the functions of your job (Nothing More Nothing less)

      So do you think anyone including USAMRIID wants anyone walking out or off the base with those type of access cards that could be easily duplicated or stolen to gain unlawful entry?

      So for Ivins he would have had one badge to get on base, and would have to go check in and get his second badge from a security officer to gain access through his deemed work areas as per mil. laws/rules/regulations that appply by law or as determined by their superior/base-command. So then that means..

      So common sense says….. If someone else has to give you a badge that has access to the BSL areas, you think that they ae going to let that go un-logged or documented? I don’t think so…. (& I stand firm on that answer)

      ( Even if they had to write info down 200 times a day) It still would have been done!

      In order for anyone to get in to the BSL-containment areas they would have to check in and get another access badge and that would be logged in by security PERIOD!

      Which means there are (2) types of badges<–& that is Fact
      The second badge just never left the base or building that it is certified for use by "SELECT" personnel.

      • DXer said

        You were at USAMRIID in 2009? Right?

        The relevant period is at USAMRIID pre-2001. Right?

        There was a dramatic change in procedures, Right?

        For example, implementation of the 2- person rule which prevented the same pattern of hours (a fact that incredibly goes unnoticed by those trying make a misleading artifact out of the time in the B3) …

        The reliable information regarding access to labs is from the FOIA documents obtained by Courant reporter relating to the employment litigation. Or various news articles. Or the wonderful USMRC FOIA person.

        But not a discussion of procedures in 1999.

        • Zicon said

          Thats the way it’s always been as a basic procedure.. The 2 person rule has always been implimented, but not always enforced depending on who you are or what you are dealing with, and most people has sense enough to not show up unless someone else was there or in certain locations at all times to avoid this very exact subject that is being debated… Which is pure common sense…

          I don’t recall that the 2 person rule if it is stated that way pre 2000 or not in a legal document that outlines the rules and regulations ( I’m not sure on that note ) But definately worth looking into..

          So for example:

          It also gets into a question that I can’t answer, but anyone can understand where I’m going with this explination..

          Say John Doe was working in the BSL-4 area on a very strict classified project for the Pentagon/DOD..
          What if John Doe was the only one authorized to work on this project, and NO ONE else could be privy to this study… And during this study it required all hours of the night/day or weekend when no one else would be there…
          How does the 2 person rule apply if it is supposed to be strictly enforced?? If only one person is doing the classified work even if it is just for a week or less…

        • DXer said

          As I said previously, and have often said, the 2-person rule did not exist in September 2001/October 2001. The argument about his time in the lab August 2001- December 2001 not ever being repeated in later years is specious. Yet continues to be made and simply goes uncorrected by those who make the argument — and who will be making the argument in the coming months.

          Note that the information on this blog has been vetted by the various former Chiefs of Bacteriology over the course of years and numerous emails.

          It took effect in early 2002.
          http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary_archives/stories/062205/35452-1.shtml

          Biosurety guidelines handed down

          Shortly before Henchal took command, the Department of the Army issued guidelines for its biosurety program, a comprehensive effort to ensure the safe and secure use of biological agents. The program encompassed physical security, biological safety, agent accountability, and personnel reliability measures to prevent unauthorized access to select agents of bioterrorism.

          While USAMRIID already had efforts in each of these areas, the Army guidelines imposed additional requirements. Some were costly–like additional security cameras, x-ray machines and other security measures. Others were burdensome–such as the “two man rule” that required researchers accustomed to working independently to have an observer present.

        • Zicon said

          The only thing that really changed is things just got tighter, and esp. in the 2000 2001 2002 years it was soo tight you could shove a piece of coal in the base and they’d spit out a diamond on the other side…

        • DXer said

          Zicon, you are mistaken. There was no tightening, none at all in 2000. Nor was there any tightening prior to 9/11.

          The rule of the blog is to cite sources so as to avoid confusing the issue. You were not even at USAMRIID in 2001.

  3. DXer said

    3/31/2005 302 Ivins interview statement

    “Following this transaction, the log should have reflected a remaining balance of 988 milliliters of RMR 1029 (i.e., 994 ml – 6 ml = 988 ml). Instead, the log reflects that 888 milliliters were remaining after this transaction – a difference of 100 milliliters. This mathematical error suggests that 100 milliliters of RMR 1029 is unaccounted for. The discrepancy had been discussed with IVINS in two prior interviews, but IVINS was questioned further clarification concerning this entry.

    IVINS said that he never noticed this mathematical error until it was brought to his attention by SSA _______. Moreover, IVINS stated that he never noticed any material missing from RMR 1029 flask, explaining that if 100 milliliters is actually missing from the RMR 1029 flask he does not know what happened to it. IVINS noted that the putative missing 100 millilters of 1029 “now gives me pause,” in light of the information conveyed to him today by the FBI concerning the genetic similarities between RMR 1029 and the anthrax used in the attacks.”

    • Zicon said

      I looked into this same question while at usamriid last year.. “It was only reported by usamriid” as a mathematical error… That was found to be correct, and was deemed by usamriid to be math error. The base was on lockdown until things were resolved in this matter. At the time they actually thought the anthrax was missing, but after lengthy searches it was found to be paperwork err. I remember the lockdown quite well.

      Also brings the bigger question of the “LOG BOOK of Initial Entry” to the building itself that houses the flask that has a guard stationed there at all times.
      Then that person receives their badge for further entry to go about the building/base… “The building security keeps everyone’s entry/exit badges for each secure area” and you can’t take the entry/exit for secure area badges home… (You can loose your job if you’re caught taking that badge out!) That’s just a known no no at usamriid…

      Also leaves the question of:

      How secure are everyone’s badges that allow them access in/out of secure/classified areas such as the 8ball/cold storage/stockroom/science labs that houses all of the biolevel 1-2-3-4 substances etc.?

      It does leave the question on where the flask came from (another us lab) only a tiny hop/skip/jump away who were the initial investigators/researchers that had control of the flask until shipment to usamriid?

      At this one lab that I won’t say, is lets look at the equipment that “they have”, and given the amount that was determined to be missing (100 mls) what could this research facility/lab turn out, if they still had an initial 100mls poly/vial of Ames?
      Does this place have the equipment and the means to turn out the powder?/such as multi gallon fermenters/centrifuge? I strongly believe so…

      One thing to look at is…

      Was the initial flask of tar like Ames fluid measured from the very beginning and signed off on by more than one person?

      Was it just assumed that there were 1000mL just because it was in a large flask?
      Experiment: Do your own control study to see if you could accurately identify the precise amount of dirty water just by looking at it with most of the measurement lines missing from the side of the flask/clear flask

      Evaporation rates?
      % +- human err…
      Could a guard have got a hold of anything during inspection rounds?
      Do any of the other log books reflect discrepancies in relation to Ivins logs?

      Bigger question..

      Were those 100mLs taken for a different project that was EXTREMELY CLASSIFIED on cia/darpa/DOD level for military weapons defense making for bipole bio-bombs… Its still likely…

      This discrepancy is exactly where the usada is getting their theories from along with the time in the labs…

      Sooo..
      How much powered anthrax could have been made from a 100mLs of liquid toxin?

      Still you have everyone that can scientifically say that usamriid does not have the right equipment for the timeframe specified by the DOJ assumptions of Bruce made the anthrax on the nights speculated…

      You’d have to be a complete idiot to help the FBI/DOJ knowing that you work in a supposedly secure facility and all the scientific ways to pin-point dna and various types of morphs of spore samples, and that you are one of only a small handful of people able to work with the virulent Ames (In the US) that is… International (Completely different)-which is even less secure of level 2-3-4 virulent/deadly agents/toxins…

      Did the DOD/Darpa have anything on the down-low classified books of trials experiments going on in the late 90’s early 00’s?

      Even during the investigation of almost a decade of being all over the place, the FBI got turned away and a lot of their questions dealing with classified info dealing with the DOD/Darpa/Cia.. You would think that they wouldn’t, but some FBI-accountability they hold huh… If the FBI gets turned away & can’t get answers, something is Definitely wrong!
      In the end is sad and doesn’t make me fear the gov. It just pisses me off even more for the BS that goes on without people being held accountable…

      The whole Hatfil deal… Very shady!!! Naval/DOD!!!

      • DXer said

        There was an audit and others discrepancies that led to a suspension of research. The Chief of Bacteriology explained to me at the time that it has to be appreciated that in past years, there were different procedures followed. Small amounts were not inventoried as such.

        But there have been long been headlines about missing anthrax and lax security — with it oft-noted that someone could just walk out with it.

        MISSING ANTHRAX SUBJECT OF FBI INQUIRY ; VARIOUS SPECIMENS …

        Pay-Per-View – Hartford Courant – Jan 23, 2002
        Also, a former Fort Detrick scientist said that because of poor inventory controls, it is possible that some of the specimens disappeared while still viable …
        #

        #
        Ex-workers: Army Lab Was Lax .

        Sarasota Herald-Tribune – Dec 21, 2001
        Fort Detrick spokesman Charles Dasey declined to com ment on the … observed during more than a decade at the lab. there was never an audit in the 11 years …

        • DXer said

          Do you have any source for the claim that there ever was a “lockdown” at USAMRIID? The FOIA person is very efficient.

          There of course was a lockdown at Dugway that garnered national headlines in connection with nerve gas, as I recall.

          In the recent instance at USAMRIID, it involved discrepancies in an audit that involved a temporary suspension of research.

          If there had been a “lockdown” there surely would be a source to cite.

          “The base was on lockdown until things were resolved in this matter. At the time they actually thought the anthrax was missing, but after lengthy searches it was found to be paperwork err. I remember the lockdown quite well.”

        • DXer said

          Here is the article describing the suspension of research (as distinguished from a “lockdown”).

          U.S. Army Lab Freezes Research on Dangerous Pathogens
          by Yudhijit Bhattacharjee on 7 February 2009, 11:39 PM | Permanent Link | 3 Comments

          The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) has suspended research activities involving biological select agents and toxins. Army officials took the step on Friday after discovering apparent problems with the system of accounting for high-risk microbes and biomaterials at the Fort Detrick, Maryland, facility.

          The lab has been under intense scrutiny since August, when the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) named former USAMRIID researcher Bruce Ivins as the perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks. Although the case never went to trial because of Ivins’s suicide on 29 July 2008, FBI officials have claimed that the evidence against him is indisputable and that he carried out the mailings using anthrax stolen from a flask at USAMRIID.

          Officials have begun a complete inventory of all select agents and toxins at the facility. All experiments using select agents will remain suspended until the accounting is finished, which could take several weeks. Several USAMRIID researchers have been grumbling about the decision, which seems to have caught them by surprise, according to a government official not connected to the lab.

          The decision was announced by institute commander Col. John Skvorak in a 4 February memo to employees. The memo, which ScienceInsider has obtained, says the standard of accountability that USAMRIID had been applying to its select agents and toxins was not in line with the standard required by the Army and the Department of Defense. USAMRIID officials believed that a satisfactory accounting involved finding all the items listed on its database; the Army and DOD wanted the converse—that is, all select agents and toxins needed to be matched to the database.

          According to the memo, any materials found without a corresponding record in the database must be reported to the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army. “I believe that the probability that there are additional vials of BSAT [biological select agents and toxins] not captured in our … database is high,” Skvorak wrote.

          A former USAMRIID scientist told ScienceInsider that in the past, inventorying of biological materials at the institute routinely turned up items that had not been listed on the database before. Those items would be added to the database without shutting down research.

      • DXer said

        “At this one lab that I won’t say, is lets look at the equipment that “they have”, and given the amount that was determined to be missing (100 mls) what could this research facility/lab turn out, if they still had an initial 100mls poly/vial of Ames?
        Does this place have the equipment and the means to turn out the powder?/such as multi gallon fermenters/centrifuge? I strongly believe so…”

        Did Southern Research Institute in Frederick — in 2001? (I don’t know).

  4. DXer said

    Dr. Ivins performed at church each Sunday. The most telling aspect of the the DOJ’s production is that it failed to produce the relevant pages of Lab Notebook 4010 and specifically removed it from USAMRIID so it could not be produced to Scott Shane under FOIA.

    That’s all a judge would have to know. The judge would lambast Kenneth Kohl just as he did for deliberately mischaracterizing the evidence in the Blackwater case.

    There needs to be a Congressional hearing at which AUSA Kohl testifies and explains why all the relevant Lab Notebook pages were not produced in accordance with FOIA.

    Anthrax and Al Qaeda: Infilitration of US Biodefense
    http://www.blurb.com/books/1204466

    • DXer said

      9/6/2007 302 explains that Bruce Ivins attended a group therapy session weekly in the late afternoon for about 1 1/4 hours. As far I can see, the FBI has failed to disclose the dates he attended even though it would have that information. Dr. Ivins was a busy guy. Church each Sunday. Red Cross meeting on the third Monday each month. Weekly therapy session. The FBI has not disclosed the date of the session and has not indicated whether it occurred on September 17 even though it would be within the information it gathered.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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: