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

Archive for April, 2010

* Is a network analysis that relies on Bruce Ivins’ publications sufficient?

Posted by DXer on April 24, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

******

Is a network analysis that relies

on Bruce Ivins’ publications

sufficient?

******

Dr. Heine talks about the missing interviews from 2002 and says they, for example, focused on these experiments that were of the FBI’s keen interest.  He says that the FBI was focused on what happened to the samples.

  • Who was in Henry Heine’s group that did the experimenting with silicon or silicone?
  • When were the experiments done?
  • Who was involved?
  • Did the experiments involve Flask 1029?
  • What was the purpose of the experiments?
  • Were they the encapsulation and aerosolization experiments for which withdrawals were made from Flask 1029?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 35 Comments »

* Army microbiologist Dr. Henry Heine, until now forbidden to speak, says … Ivins is absolutely not the anthrax attacker … it was impossible that the deadly spores had been produced undetected in Dr. Ivins’s laboratory, as the F.B.I. asserts … whoever did this is still running around out there

Posted by DXer on April 23, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

Scott Shane writes in the NYT (4/22/10) …

  • A former Army microbiologist who worked for years with  Bruce Ivins told a National Academy of Sciences panel on Thursday that he believed it was impossible that the deadly spores had been produced undetected in Dr. Ivins’s laboratory, as the F.B.I. asserts.
  • Asked by reporters after his testimony whether he believed that there was any chance that Dr. Ivins, who committed suicide in 2008, had carried out the attacks, the microbiologist, Henry S. Heine, replied, “Absolutely not.”
  • At the Army’s biodefense laboratory in Maryland, where Dr. Ivins and Dr. Heine worked, he said, “among the senior scientists, no one believes it.”
  • Dr. Heine told the 16-member panel, which is reviewing the F.B.I.’s scientific work on the investigation, that producing the quantity of spores in the letters would have taken at least a year of intensive work using the equipment at the army lab. Such an effort would not have escaped colleagues’ notice, he added later, and lab technicians who worked closely with Dr. Ivins have told him they saw no such work.
  • He told the panel that biological containment measures where Dr. Ivins worked were inadequate to prevent the spores from floating out of the laboratory into animal cages and offices. “You’d have had dead animals or dead people,” he said.
  • The public remarks from Dr. Heine, two months after the Justice Department officially closed the case, represent a major public challenge to its conclusion in one of the largest, most politically delicate and scientifically complex cases in F.B.I. history.
  • The F.B.I. declined to comment on Dr. Heine’s remarks on Thursday.
  • Members of the panel, whose chairwoman is Alice P. Gast, a chemical engineer and president of Lehigh University, declined to comment on Dr. Heine’s testimony or his remarks to reporters. The panel is expected to complete its report this fall.
  • Asked why he was speaking out now, Dr. Heine noted that Army officials had prohibited comment on the case, silencing him until he left the government laboratory in late February.
  • Dr. Heine said he did not dispute that there was a genetic link between the spores in the letters and the anthrax in Dr. Ivins’s flask — a link that led the F.B.I. to conclude that Dr. Ivins had grown the spores from a sample taken from the flask. But samples from the flask were widely shared, Dr. Heine said. Accusing Dr. Ivins of the attacks, he said, was like tracing a murder to the clerk at the sporting goods shop who sold the bullets.
  • “Whoever did this is still running around out there,” Dr. Heine said. “I truly believe that.”

read the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/us/23anthrax.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 76 Comments »

* Ed Lake does not distinguish assertions from evidence … he does not understand the grand jury process … nor does he believe that every person is innocent until PROVEN guilty

Posted by DXer on April 22, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

Ed Lake

does not distinguish assertions from evidence

… he does not understand the grand jury process

… nor does he believe that every person is innocent

until PROVEN guilty

******

ED LAKE says … But that was NOT the case with Ivins.  With Ivins it was ALL ABOUT FACTS. As the Amerithrax investigation proceeded, the facts just kept accumulating and pointing to Ivins.  Any “theory,” if there was a theory, was a theory that Ivins didn’t do it alone.  The conspiracy theorists held that theory.  However, <b>he FACTS showed that theory to be untrue.  No one could find ANY facts which showed that Ivins had a partner in the crime.  All the known facts said Ivins did it by himself. The grand jury had enough facts to indict Ivins.  Ivins had no defense.  He was given a chance to ask for a deal, but he didn’t ask.  So, he was facing the death penalty.

Perhaps, Ed, you could make a list of what these facts are that you keep referring to.

  • What evidence shows that only Ivins had access to the RMR1029 access?
  • Where is the evidence that eliminates the many others who had access?
  • What evidence shows that Ivins could have produced the anthrax powder, or that he could have done so without attracting attention? Did anyone see him do it?
  • What evidence says he went to Princeton to mail the letters, or that his absence was noted by a single human being?

Regarding your statements about a grand jury, do you have any idea how unlikely it would be for any grand jury to refuse to indict on a case of this magnitude, regardless of the weakness of the evidence? Do you understand that no defense case is ever presented to a grand jury? That no defense lawyer ever gets to review and question the assertions made by the prosecution to a grand jury?

Did you ever serve on a grand jury? I did, and I can tell you that prosecutors get close to 100% indictments, many on paper-thin cases. On my grand jury, with me taking the lead, that percentage was reduced to about 35% indictments, and the prosecutors were still talking about it 25 years later.

Do you have evidence that a plea bargain was offered to Ivins? If so, what were the terms? Regardless of the terms, any attorney who suggested that Ivins take a plea bargain in the face of the FBI’s pathetic case should be disbarred for incompetence. There was no case.

The FBI got very lucky when Ivins allegedly committed suicide (have you ever seen an autopsy report?) because now they had a suspect who could never defend himself in court, a very convenient outcome for the FBI/DOJ/Bush administration.

Ed, just saying that Ivins was guilty, as you and the FBI (and no one else that I know) assert, is not evidence.

It is frightening to me that any intelligent person does not understand the difference between assertions and evidence, or so blithely ignores the fundamental proposition that any person is innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

* Glenn Greenwald … the American people deserve a full investigation of the FBI’s pathetic case against Dr. Bruce Ivins, and President Obama should not stand in the way.

Posted by DXer on April 22, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

Obama, Benedict, Scalia ... what do they have in common?

Glenn Greenwald writes in Salon (4/21/10) …

  • the Obama administration is actively and aggressively blocking any efforts to investigate the FBI’s case against Ivins through an Obama veto threat, based on the Orwellian, backward claim that such an investigation “would undermine public confidence” in the FBI’s case “and unfairly cast doubt on its conclusions.”
  • opposing an independent examination of any aspect of the investigation will only fuel the public’s belief that the FBI’s case could not hold up in court, and that in fact the real killer may still be at large.
  • Obama’s rationale for threatening to veto an anthrax investigation (investigations would undermine the State’s credibility and thus dilute its authority) is very similar to the Catholic Church’s explanation for why it concealed reports of so many abusive priests (disclosure would undermine the Church’s credibility and thus dilute its authority).
  • See, for instance, here, as well as here (Cardinal Christoph Schönborn:  “the appearance of an infallible church was more important than anything else”).
  • That was also the same rationale invoked by Justice Scalia when enjoining the Florida recount during the 2000 election (Scalia:  a recount would “irreparably harm” Bush “by casting a cloud upon what he claims to be the legitimacy of his election”).

“Common to all of these suppression-justifying claims

is the notion that preventing the truth

from being examined and known

is necessary to preserve

institutional credibility and power.”

Read the entire column at … http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/21/hatfill/

LMW COMMENT …

I am a fervent supporter of President Obama. I believe he is both brilliant and a decent man. I support almost all of his decisions and initiatives.

On the other hand, I utterly detest the behavior of Joseph Ratzinger (aka Pope Benedict XVI) in the church’s sexual abuse scandals, and that of Justice Scalia and his 4 colleagues who appointed George W. Bush president and gave us the invasion of Iraq.

  • But I think Obama’s opposition to a full investigation of the FBI’s pathetic case against Dr. Bruce Ivins is not in America’s best interests.
  • As Pope Benedict’s refusal to face sexual abuse by by its priests is not in the best interests of the Catholic Church.
  • As suppressing the Florida recount was to America’s best interests.

It is clear to most observers that the FBI has no case against Ivins. The more documents which are finally extracted under FOIA requests, the more clear this lack of a case is.

Which leaves the questions:

  • Did the FBI really fail to solve the case?
  • If the FBI did solve the case (and it’s not Ivins) who or what are they covering up for?

These are serious matters, for the future as well as the past; the American people deserve an unambiguous answer to both questions; President Obama should not stand in the way.

Catholic Church pedophiles and their enablers …

… for more about the Catholic Church’s adamant refusal to honestly come to grips with its pedophile priests and the bishops who protect them, see  this and other posts at my political blog … http://lewandpatpolitics.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/pope-benedict-accepts-no-blame-for-his-own-horrific-failures-to-prevent-sexual-abuse-and-punish-the-many-catholic-priests-who-abused-children-or-covered-up-the-abuses-of-others-hes-a-disgrace-to/

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

* Glenn Greenwald … the Government claims it knows that Ivins is the anthrax killer; the American media largely affirms that claim; and, for so many people, that’s the end of the story, no matter how many times that exact process has so woefully misled them and no matter how many credible and even mainstream sources question it.

Posted by DXer on April 22, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

Glenn Greenwald writes in Salon (4/21/10) …

  • It requires an extreme level of irrationality to read what happened to Hatfill and simultaneously to have faith that the “real anthrax attacker” has now been identified as a result of the FBI’s wholly untested and uninvestigated case against Bruce Ivins.
  • the FBI’s case against Ivins is riddled with scientific and evidentiary holes.
  • Much of the public case against Ivins, as was true for Hatfill, was made by subservient establishment reporters mindlessly passing on dubious claims leaked by their anonymous government sources.
  • So unconvincing is the case against Ivins that even the most establishment, government-trusting voices — including key members of Congressleading scientific journals and biological weapons experts, and the editorial pages of The New York TimesThe Washington Post and The Wall St. Journal — have all expressed serious doubts over the FBI’s case and have called for further, independent investigations.
  • Yet just as was true for years with the Hatfill accusations, no independent investigations are taking place.
  • the FBI drove Ivins to suicide, thus creating an unwarranted public assumption of guilt and ensuring the FBI’s case would never be subjected to the critical scrutiny of a trial
  • the American media — with some notable exceptions — continued to do to Ivins what it did to Hatfill and what it does in general:  uncritically disseminate government claims rather than questioning or investigating them for accuracy.
  • the Government claims it knows that Ivins is the anthrax killer; the American media largely affirms that claim; and, for so many people, that’s the end of the story, no matter how many times that exact process has so woefully misled them and no matter how many credible and even mainstream sources question it.

Read the entire column at … http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/21/hatfill/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

* UPI Outside View (from a colleague at USAMRIID) … was Bruce Ivins the sole perpetrator of the anthrax mailings as the FBI claims or did his suicide result from the pressure of the investigation and the possible revelation of damaging personal information as occurred in the Hatfill case?

Posted by DXer on April 22, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

Dr. Bruce Ivins

Lawrence Sellin writes for UPI Outside View (4/22/10) …

  • I knew Bruce Ivins, although not well.
    • During my time at Fort Detrick I worked with botulinum toxin, while Ivins worked with anthrax. So, our paths didn’t cross in the laboratories.
    • As others have described him, I found Ivins eccentric, geeky and a bit socially inept.He didn’t strike me as being dangerous and I was, therefore, both surprised and shocked that the FBI concluded that he was the anthrax mailer.
    • It has been reported that Ivins underwent a similar degree of harassment and subjected to an equivalent amount of leaking of confidential information as Hatfill.
    • The FBI allegedly told Ivins’ children that he was a murderer, showed them photos of the victims and offered his son cash and a sports car if he turned against his father.
  • the FBI case against Ivins may not be rock solid as they seem to indicate.
    • Jeff Adamovicz, chief of bacteriology at Fort Detrick and Ivins’ supervisor stated that more than two samples taken from laboratories and tested by the FBI, Fort Detrick being one of them, possessed the anthrax strain linked to the mailings. What about the other samples?
    • Is it reasonable to presume that in the days and weeks after 9/11 that Ivins had the time and expertise to carry out the attacks alone and without any witnesses?
    • Furthermore, a number of anthrax experts claim that at the time Fort Detrick didn’t have the equipment necessary to produce anthrax of the type found in the anthrax letters.
  • Was Bruce Ivins the sole perpetrator of the anthrax mailings as the FBI claims or did his suicide result from the pressure of the investigation and the possible revelation of damaging personal information as occurred in the Hatfill case?
  • Did Ivins, like Hatfill before him, simply fit the profile?
  • In the opinion of many, the Amerithrax investigation still appears far from conclusive.

Read the entire article at … http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/2010/04/22/Outside-View-Anthrax-letters-Was-Bruce-Ivins-hounded-to-death/UPI-33341271930820/

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

* AFIP data shows massive silicon concentrations in the Daschle and New York Post powders … does this mean the silicon was not a contaminant, but was added deliberately?

Posted by DXer on April 20, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

******

AFIP data shows massive silicon concentrations

in the Daschle and New York Post powders

******

After being withheld by the FBI for almost nine years, AFIP finally released their much talked about (but never seen) laboratory report on the Daschle and New York Post anthrax powders.

This is the report that resulted in USAMRIID’s major General John Parker stating “We know we found silica” and AFIP (Florabel G. Mullick, MD, ScD, SES, AFIP Principal Deputy Director and department chair ) stating “Ft Detrick sought our assistance to determine the specific components of the anthrax found in the Daschle letter.”

AFIP experts utilized an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (an instrument used to detect the presence of otherwise-unseen chemicals through characteristic wavelengths of X-ray light) to confirm the previously unidentifiable substance as silica. “This was a key component,” Mullick said. “Silica prevents the anthrax from aggregating, making it easier to aerosolize.”

Now we can see exactly why AFIP reached that conclusion.

  • It seems that the silicon is hardly a contaminant
  • in the New York Post powder it appears to be the MAJOR ELEMENTAL COMPONENT!
  • Which raises the question of whether it was added deliberately.

The FBI has said that AFIP got it all wrong and the silicon is really a low concentration “contaminant.”

Do these results show that AFIP was correct all along?

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 17 Comments »

* summary of the FBI’s case … extracted from Roberto’s comment

Posted by DXer on April 20, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

******

summary of the FBI’s case extracted from Roberto’s comment …

The FBI assumes, as I infer from the summary, several basic things that seemingly have no evidential basis:

  1. that the mailings were the work of an individual and not a group,
  2. that their universe of people who had *access* to genetically identical anthrax identical to what was contained in RMR1029 is a certain size,
  3. that the anthrax was made mail-ready only after 911.

Seems to me the FBI is the one with the theory to which they are trying to attach facts. That’s how we wound up with Hatfill.  The sum total of their case only leaves us with the mere possibility that Ivins *could* have done it, especially if one allows for the incredible.

The techniques the FBI used are ones that are used when there is no evidence:  Psyche profiles, handwriting analysis (codes!), witnesses out of jail, constant pressure, selective data, hyperbolic language, leaks, etc.

There are myriad lost opportunities for hyperlinking and/or footnotes in that summary. Why? With the lack of citations, it wouldn’t even pass as a senior college thesis.  The FBI describes this as the biggest, most expensive, intensive investigation ever, but the lack of rigor is remarkable.

Instead of telling me Ivins had a kinky side, tell me how he did it and when he did it.

  • What equipment did he use exactly?
  • What technique?
  • Where’s the photocopier?
  • How long did it take to make it?
  • When did he plan it?
  • Where are the artifacts that show he did some research specific to the mailed anthrax?

This appears to be their case:

  1. RMR1029 originated in his lab,
  2. everyone else interviewed by the FBI couldn’t have done it,
  3. Ivins was weird,
  4. he did it.

I have a hard time believing a lawyer could go into a courtroom with THAT narrative and prevail.

LMW COMMENT …

My thoughts exactly. Also Senators Specter and Grassley, Congressmen Holt and Nadler, and many others, plus many competent scientists.

What’s really disturbing is that the FBI sticks to its pathetic case while offering no substantive evidence to support it.

Why does the U.S. Attorney General allow this travesty to continue?

  • Did the FBI fail to solve the case, and Ivins is just their conveniently deceased dupe?
  • Or did the FBI solve the case but they’re hiding the true perpetrators?

These are both frightening questions, especially since there does not seem to be a third option.

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 15 Comments »

* what’s going on with the NAS anthrax study? since almost all sessions have been closed, with no agendas, lists of witness, or summary reports, will we ever learn what they have been doing? … UPDATE: NAS polite non-response to my email

Posted by DXer on April 19, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

LMW to NAS (4/19/10) …

Thank you for trying to be helpful. My impression is that the FBI has tied the NAS committee in knots. The failure to disclose witnesses and testimony makes public participation meaningless.

NAS polite non-response (4/19/10) …

I’m sorry to hear that you won’t be attending our meeting this week. As the program assistant, I am not in a position to make decisions regarding any of our meetings or materials, so I will send your question to Fran Sharples, the staff lead on the project.

LMW to NAS (4/18/10) …

I have registered for the open session on April 22, but of course I cannot attend. Who would come to DC for less than 90 minutes of open hearing when all other meetings have been closed with no list of witnesses or topics? It seems to me that NAS has betrayed  its mission to conduct open hearings in which the public might be meaningfully involved. Are you hiding something?

Will ALL committee minutes eventually be made public, including …

  • ALL witnesses
  • ALL testimony
  • ALL discussion

If not, this study, especially if it confirms the FBI’s use of science, will be one more travesty in the history of this investigation.

******


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 24 Comments »

* NAS Open Session Thursday, April 22, 2010 2:20-3:45 pm … what will be revealed? what will be kept secret?

Posted by DXer on April 19, 2010

.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why? The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 21 Comments »