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

* COMMENTS page for overloaded threads

Posted by DXer on April 25, 2010

COMMENTS page for overloaded threads


please attach comments to this post

instead of to other overloaded posts


see …

for what overloaded comments pages look like

30 Responses to “* COMMENTS page for overloaded threads”

  1. richard rowley said

    Mister Lake, in responding to a comment by Bugmaster, wrote this:
    The idea that anyone could be indicted after the FBI stated conclusively that Dr. Ivins was the anthrax mailer is beyond absurd. It would be virtually impossible.
    And that’s exactly the very worst thing about the DoJ’s actions: if they had let it go, they would have been no worse off than they were in the UNABOMB Case at the 8 and a half year mark: subject to criticism from the public but still with an open, viable case that they could prosecute down the road (and did prosecute several years later when Kaczynski’s brother and sister-in-law contacted them).

    HERE (ie in the Amerithrax Case) they have supplied the future defendant(s) with perfect reasonable doubt: “Bruce Ivins ACTING ALONE did the anthrax mailings”. The defense could well call (would be foolish NOT to try to call) as witnesses FBI Director Mueller, the (last)head of the Amerithrax Task Force, the prosecutor(s) who announced that Ivins did it etc.
    They cut off their noses (in the case) to spite their faces…..

  2. DXer said

    In an email dated February 15, 2003, Bruce Ivins wrote a colleague

    “I firmly believe if I had been allowed to swab DSD labs and offices as thoroughly as I swabbed initially in Bacti Division, that I would have found “hot” spores. It was (and still is) an incredible coverup! Have a good weekend!!!! Enjoy the Daytona 500!!!!!”

    Now DSD (that’s Diagnostic Divsion) labs and offices were where the FBI anthrax expert was making dried powder for the DARPA researchers.

    And so it truly is outrageous that FBI and DOJ individuals have prevented this email from being produced for nearly two years.

    If all the emails are not produced this week, the FBI and DOJ people responsible (given there was no justification) should be fired.

    And there is a paper trail in emails to James Ferrara and John Peterson revealing the identity of the people running interference.

    Of course, the Colonel at USAMRIID bears responsibility for allowing it to happen.

    Colonel, How about the emails be produced today and we’ll look to the future and let bygones be bygones?

  3. DXer said


    Would you agree he could not have mailed it the evening of the 17th if he was a Red Cross meeting in Frederick?

  4. DXer said

    The head of intelligence for Egyptian Islamic Jihad, who was recruiting at Cairo Medical in the early 1980s and then joined the US Army, worked for the CIA, served as informant to the FBI, and took Zawahiri on tours of United States, had a document on his computer seized by the FBI that outlined principles of cell security that would be followed. It was seized by the FBI swarming his residence in 1998. The memo was titled “Cocktail.”

    • DXer said

      In a long memo in mid-December, that I was told would be routed to the Zawahiri Task Force, I explained the importance of proving who Zawahiri recruited as part of his plan to use anthrax against US targets to retaliate for the rendering of senior EIJ leaders, including his brother. The EIJ/Vanguards of Conquest announced an intent to use mailed anthrax if VOC #2 (under Agiza) Mahmoud Mahjoub was denied.
      It was denied on October 5, 2001, and the anthrax mailer dropped what he was doing and rushed to mail the anthrax. The CIA has known this since December 2001.

      • DXer said

        Dr. Bruce Ivins hosted one Egyptian visitor in the B3 who was the lifelong friend of a former Egyptian Islamic Jihad member, a schoolmate, recruited by Ayman Zawahiri. They worked together over the course of days in the BL-3 lab with virulent Ames.

        There was no advance approval of the foreign scientist to be working with Ames. Approval was obtained by email after the foreign scientist arrived. Dr. Ivins says he did not know he was not a US citizen until after he arrived.

        It is the sign of a tremendously incompetently conducted investigation — it would seem based on the face of the documents provided — for this interview of Bruce Ivins to not have been conducted prior to February 2005.

        At the very least, the compartmentalization of investigative squads was sharply criticized by Special Agent Lambert who told Director Memo that agents would not be able to “connect the dots” if there were such compartmentalization.

        Director Mueller’s proffered explanation that it was to avoid leaks does not cut it. It was the inadequate leak investigation that caused the leaks to continue into 2003.

        The leaker’s daughter represented Ali Al-Timimi pro bono. (Sharing a suite with leading anthrax expert Ken Alibek and former Deputy USAMRIID Commander Bailey, Dr. Al-Timimi has been described as an “anthrax weapons suspect” who was associated with the 911 imam and Bin Laden’s sheik.)

        • DXer said

          Lew has uploaded the documents disclosed by the DOJ indicating that the two University of Michigan researchers had been vaccinated for both anthrax and plague.

    • DXer said

      Here is a February 2005 interview of Bruce Ivins about the University of Michigan researcher where Dr. Ivins explained he had not realized he was not a US citizen.

  5. DXer said

    Let’s review the materials produced by the Department of Justice.


    “The following investigation was conducted by Special Agent (SA) ___________ of the federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on February 24, 2005:

    The United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) Keycard Access records from 1998 through 2002 were queried for visiting foreign scientist ___________ [Tarek Hamouda] and visiting scientist __________, [Michael Hayes] both from the _______________ [University of Michigan] who have been previously been identified visiting USAMRIID circa May 1998.

    All available records were searched for names containing ___________ or ________ or ________ all queries met with negative results.

    As previously reported, Bruce Ivins was the USAMRIID point of contact for _____ and _________. A query of all available records for “Ivins*” met with positive results. Records indicate Bruce E. Ivins showed keycard activity during a date range of August 1, 1998 through through June 02, 2002.

    [Note: records did not exist prior to August 1998]

    • DXer said


      On February 18, 2005, an Internet author query on website: for _____________________ [University of Michigan] scientists _____________ [Tarek Hamouda] and ________________ [Michael Hayes] met with positive results.

      ________________________________________________ the following publication “A Novel Surfactant Nanoemulsion with Broad-Spectrum Sporicidal Activity against Bacillus Species,” (The Journal of Infectious Diseases 1999; 180: 1939-1949.

      Briefly, page ___ indicated ______ and ____ are _________________________________________________________ have a patent application entitled _____________________________

      Briefly, page three “Material and Methods” section indicated, “B anthracis spores, Ames and Vollum 1B strains, were supplied by Bruce Ivins (US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases [USAMRIID}, Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD)… Four other strains of B. anthracis were provided by _________

      Briefly, page ten “Discussion” section indicated, “BCTP [the novel surfactant nanoemulsion] and its derivative BCTP 401 appear to have great potential as environmental decontamination agents of for treatment of exposed persons in either a military operation or terrorist attack.”

      Briefly, page ten “Acknowledgements” section indicated “Bruce Ivins,” _________________________________ for their technical support … for supplying B. anthracis and strains and space at Louisiana State University.”

      [Note: Dr. Hamouda thanked the scientists who later in the Ivins case would be identified as Former Colleague #1 (Mara Linscott) and Former Colleague #1 (Patricia Fellows) for providing technical assistance. He also thanked top Army anthrax expert Arthur Friedlander for providing technical assistance. He also thanked Kimothy L. Smith, who would do genetics work on the submitted samples for the FBI in 2001 and 2002, for supplying BL-3 lab space — as well as Martin Hugh-Jones at LSU. Dr. Hugh-Jones has explained to the 40,000 subscribers to ProMed that he is convinced Dr. Ivins is innocent.]

      • DXer said

        Now the next item in the record that appears is “A Novel Surfactant Nanoemulsion with Broad-Spectrum Sporicidal Activity against Bacillus Species.” I believe it is the only article that appears in the 2700 pages. I believe I began posting it in October 2008 or so.

        It states that it was “Presented in part: 98th general meeting of the American Society for Microbiology, Atlanta, May 1998 (poster A49); 38th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, San Diego 1998 (late-breaker slide session II, LB-9); 99th general meeting of the American Society of Microbiology, Chicago, May 1999 (poster A300).”

        When I wasn’t able to get a copy a year or two ago from ASM or ICAAC, I FOIAed the University of Michigan but they produced no documents. University of Michigan, by reason of its failure to produce documents under FOIA, became part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. James Baker, Tarek Hamouda, and Michael Hayes all failed to provide a copy of the presentations — they thus all became part of the problem rather than part of the solution. FOIA is intended to provide for transparency where millions of public money has been spent on their work.

        The article provided by the Department of Justice indicates:

        “Financial support: Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (contract MDA 972-1-007 of the Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures Program).”

        When $12 million of taxpayer money is spent to fund the research, it is not unreasonable for taxpayers expect a copy of the presentations before ASM and ICAAC to be provided upon request. The same arrogance and violation of FOIA was the result of a request to Sandia and so the failure seems not to be limited to the University of Michigan. Despite the memos written by President Obama and the Attorney General, there has been no increase in responsiveness under FOIA according a recent report analyzing the statistics.

        When Perseus, the DC venture firm once headed by Richard Holbrooke that invested $50 million in NanoBio, similarly failed to respond to email and telephone inquiries, it too became part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

        • DXer said

          The next time that appears is titled GRAND JURY MATERIAL – DISSEMINATE PURSUANT TO RULE 6(e).

          On March 19, 2003 ___________________ born ___________ with Social Security Account Number ___________ was interview at ___ place of employment, the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), Fort Detrick, Maryland. The interview was conducted by Inspector in Charge (IIC) ________ and Special Agents (SAs) ___________________ and ____________ all of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
          ___________ provided the following information:

          Then then remainder of the page is redacted.

        • DXer said


          The next item is a long meaty interview — and much of it was redacted. The 2/15-17/2005 interview of a scientist at USAMRIID was conducted after a polygraph. It is 14 pages.

          “_________ concerns about the dried Bg work were not necessarily ethical concerns._________________________
          The International Convention says that as long as the work is on pathogenesis or vaccine efficacy, the work is not considered offensive in nature.”

          The interviewee mentions someone who “had wanted to move toward using dried anthrax in the challenges.” (Note: We know that in 2001 USAMRIID was using “single spore aerosols” in wet mist. See December 2001 presentation recently linked).

          “The only place ___ recalled seeing Ba in an odd location was in Room ___ of Building ______. This is a lab where _________ and _________ were working on a John Hopkins project involving the use of aerosol samples of Ba in a study of _________________. The labeled tubes of Ba samples were stored in a refrigerator which had a sliding glass door where ___ had intended to place __________________. [Note: Dr. Hamouda also had his decontamination agent tested by the JH-APL researchers].

          A long passage was then redacted.

          ______ was less than impressed with the security at USAMRIID when ___ arrived there. ___ was very concerned about safety. _____ recalled that _________________ once transported plague bacteria between buildings by the “VIP” method, which means “vial in pocket”, instead of the proper packaging and transport procedures.”

        • DXer said


          Skipping over the interviewee who used the word “Password” as his computer password, let’s turning to the March 8, 2005 Washington Field Office memo that states that the notebooks of Ivins group were reviewed “to identify any individuals who had access to Ba Ames and were not already under investigation, previously-unknown places where BaAmes was stored, people within USAMRIID or people and places outside USAMRIID to whom Ba Ames was distributed by this researh group, and any other details of interest.”

        • DXer said

          Now, as support for the $12 million in government funding that should have made the University of Michigan more scrupulous in complying with Freedom of Information Act, here is an article from the time explaining that the government investment promised to bestow great dividends on the researchers supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins, one of whom was a former Zawahiri associate.

          Detroit Free Press

          October 7, 2001, Sunday

          New substance stops germs from spreading

          BYLINE: By Wendy Wendland-Bowyer


          LENGTH: 893 words

          ANN ARBOR, Mich. _ The white liquid resembling skim milk that fills bottles in the back of an Ann Arbor laboratory doesn’t look like a potentially powerful tool in the war against bioterrorism.
          But looks can be deceiving.

          Its inventors say the substance, called NanoProtect, can be sprayed or smeared on clothing, vehicles, people or anything that has been exposed to a slew of deadly substances, including anthrax spores and smallpox virus. And, they say, NanoProtect will zap the bad stuff.

          “It bombards the bacteria and virus. It blows it up,” said Dr. James Baker Jr., head of the University of Michigan Medical School’s department of allergy and immunology. Baker, NanoProtect’s chief creator, also directs the U-M’s Center for Biologic Nanotechnology.
          Nanotechnology, manipulating atoms and molecules, has been touted by the government as the field that will lead the next industrial revolution. It’s also the science behind NanoProtect.

          Baker said the new substance could have a huge impact, and he and his research team would like it to get expedited approval from the government so it can be put into the hands of the military and the public.

          In the weeks since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, researchers all over the country working on ways to thwart bioterrorists have found an increased interest _ and urgency _ surrounding their work.

          A report released two weeks ago by the U.S. General Accounting Office shows the federal government will spend at least $156.8 million this fiscal year on research into technology to fight biological agents, plus an additional $347 million on preparedness. That’s up from $141.2 million last year on research and $296 million on preparedness.

          So many government agencies _ from the Energy Department to the Secret Service _ are doing so many things, the overall coordination is fragmented, the GAO report notes.

          The Defense Department funded the research into NanoProtect with a 5-year, $11.8-million grant.

          The Ann Arbor group has completed its studies and published its test results in several peer-review journals. NanoProtect also passed extensive testing at a U.S. Army site in Utah and was mentioned as a promising new product by a Defense Department official who testified before a U.S. Senate subcommittee this summer.

          Despite its obvious military uses, Baker, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, said that until Sept. 11, NanoBio Corp. _ the company he and his colleagues formed to market the product _ had planned on commercial uses first.

          NanoProtect can be made in 300 formulations to combat a variety of germs, including household bacteria and those that cause sexually transmitted diseases and food-borne illnesses. Testing continues on a nasal spray that could be used, for example, before boarding an airplane.

          “Until terrible Tuesday, there was no . . . urgency on the government’s part to adopt this,” said Ted Annis, NanoBio’s chief executive officer. The year “2006 was when it would have be phased in to the troops. Now it appears the time line may be advanced.”

          NanoProtect is made of vegetable oil and biodegradable detergents formed at the nano level. In that super-small world, objects are measured in nanometers, or 1 billionth of a meter _ 10,000 times narrower than a human hair. For NanoProtect, the technology produces droplets with a surface tension that causes them to attack and destroy the bacteria and viruses they come in contact with, Baker said.

          NanoProtect would be used after a biological agent is released. With anthrax, for example, the spores can live in the air for hours, then be stirred up every time someone or something, like a car, passes by. NanoProtect could be applied to neutralize the spores.

          Bleach and similar substances also can neutralize anthrax spores, but they entail environmental concerns, Baker said. NanoProtect, he said, is safe enough to rub on the skin, inhale or even swish around the mouth.

          NanoBio moved into its 6,500-square-foot building a few days before Sept. 11.

          Even as the seven-member staff settles in, the main focus suddenly became getting the product registered with the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. Annis said it isn’t clear how long that will take. If approval is received, the plan is to make NanoProtect available to the public as quickly as possible, Annis said.

          Meanwhile in Lansing, BioPort Corp., the Michigan laboratory that makes the country’s only supply of anthrax vaccine, will soon seek final federal approval for its renovated facility.

          Federal authorities previously found contamination and manufacturing problems at BioPort. Two years ago the building was renovated and BioPort has been trying to get the facility approved by the FDA since then.

          On Oct. 15, BioPort plans to submit its final paperwork to the FDA, company spokeswoman Kim Brennen Root said this week. If the FDA gives the go-ahead, BioPort can start making its vaccine, possibly as early as next year.

          The Michigan National Guard has begun providing security at BioPort. The company said in a statement last week that new security measures were put in place after the Defense Department reviewed the existing ones.


        • DXer said

          A DARPA Program Manager once told a friend of mine that they even knew what machine was used. Well, what machine was that? Spraydryer, lyophilizer, fermenter, fluid bed dryer? They seem all too ordinary to bother to mention so early after the mailings.

          Was the machine instead a Corona Pulmonary Discharge such as was being used by DARPA researchers on Ames spores? (to include the FBI consultants)? How else would they be loaded in the letters? In a liquid through a syringe? How would a unipolar charge then be imparted? Isn’t the suggestion by DARPA researcher Ken Alibek that the mail sorting charges imparted the charge mistaken? Was a CPD probe instead inserted into the envelope? We know that USAMRIID was making single spore wet aerosols. Is the key to understanding the kinetic energy of the particles the CPD?

        • DXer said

          p.s. The DARPA Program Manager said this to my friend in Fall 2001.

      • DXer said

        Muslim Community Assoc. of Ann Arbor v. Ashcroft, 459 F. Supp. 2d 592 (2006) states:

        “MCA owns and administers a mosque and an Islamic school, the Michigan Islamic Academy, in Ann Arbor, Michigan. MCA maintains a variety of records and religious documents associated with the mosque and the Michigan Islamic Academy. (Complaint, P 73) MCA has alleged in the Complaint that because of the relationship between MCA, its members and leaders, and persons and organizations investigated, questioned, detained, or arrested since September llth, MCA believes that the FBI has used or is currently using Section 215 to obtain records or personal belongings of it and its members, students, [*599] and constituents. (Complaint, P 45) MCA specifically cites the action taken against Rabih Haddad who was an active member of the MCA and volunteer teacher at MCA’s Michigan Islamic Institute. Mr. Haddad was arrested on immigration charges, denied [**15] bond, and held in solitary confinement for months with no access to his family or outside world. Some of the MCA members founded the Free Rabih Haddad Committee in December 2001 and MCA has held numerous fundraisers and public rallies to protest Mr. Haddad’s detention. (Complaint, PP 46-47) MCA also cites individual cases involving its leadership and members where MCA claims certain evidence used against them was obtained through wiretaps under the Patriot Act. (Complaint, PP 49-73)”

      • DXer said

        I called and left a message for Dr. Linscott in 2008 but she did not return the call.

        I emailed Dr. Fellows and she did not respond to the email.

        • DXer said

          I once was talking to a friend of mine about Ayman Zawahiri. He grew up down the street from Ayman. He was asking who was helping me and telling me what a dangerous fanatic Zawahiri was. I told him that in 2001 and 2002 I had been using the Foreign Broadcasting Information System (FBIS). FBIS is a publicly available CIA database that translates foreign news articles. The FBIS had a lot more articles than US media about the announcement that Ayman Zawahiri was planning to use anthrax against US targets. But if CIA analysts were on the task force, this is all something that should have been well-known to them, especially given that they should have had the benefit of Al-Najjar’s lengthy translated confession from 1998. Then when I happen to call the local field office on September 11, 2002 and ask to speak to someone who knows something about anthrax, the agent’s only questions are (1) who is helping me, and (2) he wants to know who I had first contacted (and confirm that the local field office had not been in the loop). (Usually the person helping is a whistleblowing client who knows all there is to know). But given that this dates to 2002, it simply is incomprehensible that Arthur Friedlander is not faxing the 20 pages regarding Tarek Hamouda’s visit in February 2002 rather than February 2005. There has been a provable failure on the part of the Amerithrax investigation to share information in a way that led to proper intelligence analysis. FBI Director Mueller says the buck stops here but we then saw the gobblydygook he served up 7 months late to a Senator in response to a simple question. Anyone who is not part of the solution is part of the problem — and if people don’t think there is going to be accountability, they are mistaken. So it would be best to start sharing information notwithstanding bureaucratic niceties. For starters, if John Peterson really needs to take years to produce a stack of Ivins emails, then maybe someone else with greater technological savvy should take over the job.

        • DXer said

      • DXer said

        The CIA knew that Ayman Zawahiri used “school” to refer to Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

        The CIA knew that the Green Team, for example, was the name that Saif Adel used in leading the group to Somalia under top anthrax planner Atef’s direction. See West Point center document. (Ayman reported to Atef on the anthrax planning and Adel guided Jdey’s martyrdom video found in the rubble of Atef’s home).

        There were many CIA analysts on Amerithrax. And so when they come up with the “FNY” code, there are a whole lot of people who might be better suited to other lines of work because they sure suck at connecting the dots.

        It is logically possible that Zawahiri was framed by the person(s) or group(s) with access to intel about the code that Ayman Zawahiri was using, but there is absolutely no indication that Bruce Ivins was one of them.

        (Egyptian security services seems a better candidate than the CIA or Mossad for a conspiracy theory given the close connection to the threat to use mailed anthrax if Mahmoud Mahjoub’s bail was denied).

  6. DXer said


    You never correct your mistakes. Now let’s consider this boner and see if you correct it. You’ve recently created a timeline on which on the key date — September 18, 2001 — you write:

    “Tuesday, September 18 – The media letters are postmarked.

    Ivins arrives for work at 7:03 a.m., leaves again at 8:35 a.m., and he doesn’t return again until 8:14 p.m., more than enough time to drive to New Jersey. The letters could also have been mailed on this day.”

    Um, Ed. The interview statements you purport to have read explain that he drove to Covance that day. With co-workers. In a government car. That he signed out. Why didn’t you mention this in your timeline? You say he doesn’t have an alibi and yet are incredibly reckless with such a key fact — were you unaware of this trip to Covance you don’t mention? Now given that it is undisputed that he took this trip, how was there “more than enough time to drive to New Jersey.” Are you suggesting that he ducked out and drove from the Covance facility — that he said, “hey, guys, back in a bit?” Why would you accuse Dr. Ivins of murder without mentioning that he has an alibi all of September 18, supported by the co-workers who travelled with him?

    • BugMaster said

      Ed will be proven wrong. When that day comes, will he post retractions and apologies on his website, or will we all just see “site not found”?

      • DXer said


        That’s not what you’ve been doing Ed. You for example for many months argued that the genetics pointed exclusively to Dr. Ivins — when the DOJ was saying it pointed to hundreds of people (377 at Ft. Detrick alone).

      • BugMaster said

        You will be proven wrong Ed, when the individual who actually dropped the letters in the Princeton mailbox either gives himself up and confesses, or is indicted.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: