* happy new year

******

To all of you who come to this blog,

those who contribute,

those who monitor …

I wish all of you a happy and healthy 2011.

And may all the answers to all the questions we ask

appear like magic in the coming year.

LEW

******

* Dugway Proving Ground … a major U.S. Army resource for bio-defense research and testing … how has Dugway’s budget been impacted by the 2001 anthrax attacks?

the sun sets at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah

******

see previous posts

* who benefited from the 2001 anthrax attacks? … $50 billion to the biodefense industry … > $6 billion for biodefense research and facilities

* who benefitted from the FBI failure to solve the 2001 anthrax mailings case? … first to benefit … the Bush/Cheney plan to invade Iraq

******

from the Dugway Proving Ground web site …

http://www.dugway.army.mil/index.php/index/content/id/20

Dugway Proving Ground covers 798,214 acres: an area approximately the size of Rhode Island. It is the Army’s largest land mass facility, and thus is an ideal environment to be the Defense Department’s leader in chemical and biological defensive testing, environmental characterization, and remediation technology testing. Such tests evaluate the reliability and survivability of all types of military equipment in a chemical or biological environment.

Life Sciences Division  – Mission

• To design, perform, and report results of biological defense testing in support of the West Desert Test Center (WDTC) mission
• To safely test our warfighters future equipment to the highest standards within cost and schedule.
• Testing is performed in the field with biosimulant aerosol challenge materials.
• In Bio-Safety Level II (BSL2) and Bio-Safety Level III (BSL3) laboratories, respectively, biological simulants and select agents are aerosolized to test detection, decontamination and protection systems.
• Additionally, the division provides materials and a staff of scientists as expert support for testing at Dugway Proving Ground (DPG), as well as biological defense worldwide.

Aerosol Technology Branch – Functions

• Acts as the aerosol center of expertise for Dugway Test Activity, maintaining expertise in the areas of aerobiology, aerosol instrumentation, characterization, dissemination and calibration and aerosol physics.
• Maintains and operates aerosol science laboratories up to Bio-Safety Level III (BSL3), including the Aerosol Characterization Facility, Aerosol Simulant Exposure Chamber and Containment Aerosol Chamber.
• Is responsible for the management and operation of outdoor field trials utilizing biological simulants.
• Prepares test chambers and support equipment for simulant and pathogen aerosol testing. Responsible for the characterization (particle size and concentration) of aerosols utilized for testing to include the operation of test fixtures and aerosol generation and sampling equipment.
• Identifies methodology shortfalls dealing with aerosol issues. Develops and executes methodology investigations to remedy deficiencies.

Bio-Technology Branch – Functions

• Provides expertise in testing and evaluation of biological defense systems and equipment with applications spanning multiple disciplines including microbiology, molecular biology, biochemistry, metrology, aerosol science, materials science, and environmental science.
• Produces bacteria, fungi, viruses, toxins, agent-like organisms, biological simulates, and environmental interferents for joint CBDP developmental and operational testing and evaluation.
• Operates fully capable Bio Safety Level III (BSL3) laboratories employing personnel certified in Biological Personal Reliability Program and Special Immunization Program.
• Conducts rigorous qualitative and quantitative analysis of biological test materials from government and civilian programs utilizing techniques such as: ELISA, qPCR, RT-PCR, MicroSeq, VNTR, ECL, MIDI, Biolog, API Test Strips, BCA Protein Assay, ProteomeLab PF 2D, GC-MS, HPLC, gradient centrifugation, gel electrophoresis, scanning and transmission electron microscopy, and optical spectrophotometery (FTIR, UV-VIS, fluorescence, and backscatter), as well as practices traditional microbiological, small mammalian, and chemical techniques.
• Designs and implements testing protocols for point- & standoff-detection systems, individual protection and collective protection equipment, decontamination reagents and materials, stability and survivability studies.
• Carries out regular technical readiness evaluations and validation/accreditation studies of acquisition technologies.

******

Carol Ezzell wrote in Nature (1988) …

http://www.foet.org/past/documents/NatureSeptember291988.pdf

• Yielding to pressure from local residents and anti-biotechnology activist Jeremy Rifkin, the US army last week announced that it will drop its plans to build a high-containment weapons laboratory at its Dugway Proving Ground in Utah.
• Instead the army intends to construct a less sophisticated facility that would not be suitable for testing the microbes which most worry opponents: genetically engineered microbes and those which cause incurable diseases.
• The army has contended that the tests it plans to conduct at the Dugway facility do not require the highest containment level (biosafety level 4), but that it would prefer to build such a facility in case its needs change, and as an added degree of safety.
• It played down the option of building a lower-containment biosafety level 3 laboratory on these grounds in the environmental impact statement on its biological defence activities. That impact statement was produced as a result of a lawsuit brought by Rifkin in 1985 (see Nature 331, 647; 1988).

******

Leigh Dethman wrote in the Deseret Morning News (5/26/2005) …

• Nobody really knows everything that happens at Dugway Proving Ground.
• The military base in Utah’s west desert where defenses against deadly biological and chemical weapons are tested is a constant target of rumors and speculation.
• But one thing is certain — Dugway’s mission is valuable to the Department of Defense.
• The facility received top rankings from the Pentagon in a report released to the Base Realignment and Closure commission.
• Dugway’s primary mission is to test chemical and biological defense systems. The facility also performs nuclear, biological and chemical survivability testing on defense gear.
• Utah’s congressional delegation believes Dugway’s mission will increase dramatically, but that it will be funded through the Department of Homeland Security.

******

LMW COMMENT …

I have been trying to get Dugway’s budget numbers for bio-defense work in the years since 2001, so far without success. Does anyone have a source for that information?

******

I don’t claim to know who committed the 2001 anthrax attacks.

But I have written a novel which tells a story that many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, say is “quite plausible.”

what do readers say about CASE CLOSED?

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/case-closed-reader-comments/

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

* who benefited from the 2001 anthrax attacks? … $50 billion to the biodefense industry … > $6 billion for biodefense research and facilities

LMW COMMENT …

It has been amply demonstrated on this blog that the FBI’s publicly revealed case against Dr. Bruce Ivins is bogus.

Let’s assume for the moment that the FBI does not have more evidence to prove that Bruce Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks. Let’s further assume that, after the largest investigation in its history, the FBI has in fact solved the case.

This raises the possibility that the FBI knows who did it but they’re not telling.

If so, who is the FBI protecting? And why?

In pursuing answers to these questions, it is perhaps useful to consider … who has been a beneficiary of the 2001 anthrax attacks and the FBI’s failure to solve the case?

A recent post on this blog suggested that the Bush/Cheney decision to invade Iraq was aided in large measure by the clear (and false) message they put out that Saddam Hussein had anthrax and the means to deliver it to the U.S.

Secretary of State Colin Powell at the UN on Feb 5, 2003

See this previous post at … * who benefitted from the FBI failure to solve the 2001 anthrax mailings case? … first to benefit … the Bush/Cheney plan to invade Iraq

******

Who else has become awash in cash

as a result of the 2001 anthrax attacks?

 

biodefense and biodefense research are big business

the Biodefense industry …

• The major contemporary bioterrorist event which has opened up programs of research and development in pharmaceutical countermeasures and treatments was the anthrax mail attacks which occurred in October 2001.
• Since then the biodefense industry has grown massively, with the US releasing around $50 billion in biodefence funding in 2001-2009.

http://www.marketresearch.com/product/display.asp?productid=2445038

• In the years since anthrax-laced letters were sent to members of Congress and news organizations in late 2001, killing five people, almost $50 billion in federal money has been spent to build new laboratories, develop vaccines and stockpile drugs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03anthrax.html?_r=1&hp

bioterrorism research …

• Nature 2002 … prompted by the recent anthrax scare in the US, the Bush administration is to enhance bioterrorism research programs at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v8/n1/full/nm0102-6a.html

• Forbes 2010 … The government has spent $5.6 billion during the last six years under one program, HHS’s Project BioShield. The FY2011 budget calls for $6.48 billion in bio-defense spending across many agencies.

http://www.forbes.com/2010/10/21/bioterror-vaccines-manufacturing-technology-breakthroughs-biodefense.html

******

I don’t claim to know who committed the 2001 anthrax attacks. But I have written a novel which tells a story that many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, say is “quite plausible.”

what do readers say about CASE CLOSED?

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/case-closed-reader-comments/

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

* Simulations (using NIST EDX software) of the weight percentages of the element silicon in the Daschle and New York Post anthrax powders

to learn more about Lew Weinstein and his novels,

go to … http://lewweinsteinauthorblog.com/

Slides and text submitted by a regular CASE CLOSED blog participant …

• These simulations were performed using NIST’s EDX quantitative analysis software and data from the AFIP lab report.
• The weight percentage of silicon in the Daschle powder is calculated to be 2.25%. This is slightly higher than the 1.45% released by the FBI.
• But much more significant than that is the New York Post powder. It is calculated to contain 32.75% silicon. The FBI claim there “was insufficient sample” to determine the quantity of silicon in this powder. This is demonstrably untrue.
• The reason the FBI do not want people to know the weight percentage of silicon in the New York Post powder can be explained as follows.
  • If they admit 30% content they are then admitting deliberate addition of a silicon chemical for all the attack powders.
  • This does not fit with their prosecution narrative against Dr Ivins.

******

Daschle (SPS02-57-03) powder

******

New York Post (SPS02-88-01) powder

* have FBI Director Mueller and Congressman Holt met? if not, is a meeting scheduled?

13 days have passed …

we have sent emails and made phone calls to Congressman Holt’s office,

none of which have been returned …

what’s going on?

******

 

FBI Director Mueller & Congressman Holt

******

On December 9, Congressman Holt wrote to FBI Director Mueller …

• Despite the FBI’s original charge to the NAS to examine only the scientific data and conclusions in the case, it now appears that the FBI—which has consistently botched and bungled this case from the beginning—may be seeking to try to steer or otherwise pressure the NAS panel to reach a conclusion desired by the Bureau.
• I ask that you meet with me this week to explain the FBI’s troubling conduct in this matter.

It has now been a week … Have they met? … Is a meeting scheduled?

******

NOTE:

Robert Mueller became the FBI Director on September 4, 2001.

It’s a 10 year appointment, ending in September 2011.

******

see also …

* DXer: why should we trust NAS when they don’t comply with the statutory obligation to release the materials submitted by the FBI?

* hints of conflict between the NAS and the FBI are found in the unexpected delay of the NAS report on the FBI’s anthrax science … the FBI is obviously trying to hide the truth as long as possible and the NAS is witholding documents it is required by law to release

******

LMW COMMENT …

FBI Director Mueller has a record of stonewalling, even members of Congress. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

Of course, by now you know my view of the FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins and their desperate effort to keep the facts from being known.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

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 perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

 

 

* DXer: why should we trust NAS when they don’t comply with the statutory obligation to release the materials submitted by the FBI?

 

******

see also …

* hints of conflict between the NAS and the FBI are found in the unexpected delay of the NAS report on the FBI’s anthrax science … the FBI is obviously trying to hide the truth as long as possible and the NAS is witholding documents it is required by law to release

******

DXer reports (12/11/10) …

Why should we trust the NAS reading of issues that are arcane and not even probative of anything when they can’t even read the plain language of the statute?

They are obligated to make available for inspection and copying ” written materials presented to the committee by individuals who are not officials, agents, or employees of the Academy”

Under controlling on-point District of Columbia precedent that I’ve previously cited and discussed at length, that has been found to mean it needs to be produced contemporaneous with its production to NAS by the agency — so that the public’s participation can be informed by the documents and thus meaningful.

Federal Advisory Committee Act

• UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED
• TITLE 5. GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES
• APPENDIX 2. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT
§ 15. Requirements relating to the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Public Administration

(a) In general.–An agency may not use any advice or recommendation provided by the National Academy of Sciences or National Academy of Public Administration that was developed by use of a committee created by that academy under an agreement with an agency, unless–

(1) the committee was not subject to any actual management or control by an agency or an officer of the Federal Government; (2) in the case of a committee created after the date of the enactment of the Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments of 1997, the membership of the committee was appointed in accordance with the requirements described in subsection (b)(1); and (3) in developing the advice or recommendation, the academy complied with–

(A) subsection (b)(2) through (6), in the case of any advice or recommendation provided by the National Academy of Sciences; or (B) subsection (b)(2) and (5), in the case of any advice or recommendation provided by the National Academy of Public Administration.
(b) Requirements.–The requirements referred to in subsection (a) are as follows:

(1) ***  The Academy shall make available to the public, at reasonable charge if appropriate, written materials presented to the committee by individuals who are not officials, agents, or employees of the Academy, unless the Academy determines that making material available would disclose matters described in that section.

******

LMW COMMENT …

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

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 perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

 

* Dr. Ivins’ email to one of the two undercover FBI agents who had befriended him on the cruise

 

******

******

******

 

******

 

******

 

 

******

 

* according to Dr. Ivins’ email with Former Colleague #1 (Mara Linscott), produced last week by USAMRIID (withheld for 2 years by JAG), Bruce was not taking ambien, the sleeping aid, in Fall 2001

 

Dr. Bruce Ivins

******

******

LMW COMMENT …

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

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 perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

 

* hints of conflict between the NAS and the FBI are found in the unexpected delay of the NAS report on the FBI’s anthrax science … the FBI is obviously trying to hide the truth as long as possible and the NAS is witholding documents it is required by law to release

is the FBI controlling NAS independence ???

******

DXer comment (12/11/10) …

• By its withholding of documents, hasn’t NAS been part of the problem rather than part of the solution?
• For its spokesman to think he could not characterize the documents missed the point.  Under the statute and controlling District of Columbia precedent, he and the NAS are required to PRODUCE them.
• By not complying with FACA, the NAS prevented meaningful participation in the proceeding before it — prevented comments by outside experts who had actually made an aerosol, prevented comments informed by the documents.
• GAO therefore should find a way to receive comments from those scientists who unlike the NAS panel members actually have aerosol experience… once those scientists can be informed by any documents eventually produced in response to FOIA litigation.
• Amerithrax represents the greatest failure of intelligence in American history.  As for finding fault, let’s start with the prosecutor and investigator who present at the NAS in January.
• Hasn’t the entire NAS review merely served to delay production of key documents for 2 years?
• Is there anything under the Federal Advisory Committee Act that exempts the documents produced to the NAS by the FBI from production?  No.

Later Update from AP (12/10/10) …

• The National Academy of Sciences says it is extending its review of the investigation into the 2001 anthrax mailings to consider new information from the FBI.

• The Washington-based academy said Friday that the FBI delivered additional materials last week after it received a draft of the academy’s report.

•  

  The academy had planned to release the report this month. It now says it will hold one last meeting, probably in January, to hear an FBI presentation on the new material.

• The public release is now expected in February.

Megan Eckstein writes in the Frederick News-Post (12/10/10) …

• The National Academy of Sciences quietly delayed releasing its evaluation of the science used to link Fort Detrick scientist Bruce Ivins to the anthrax attacks of 2001, a move that escaped notice of many, but drew criticism from one congressman.
• U.S. Rep. Rush Holt, a Democrat who represents the central New Jersey district from where the anthrax letters were mailed, said the NAS delayed releasing its report because the FBI asked the panel members to review 500 more pages of classified documents before reaching a final conclusion.
• In a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller, Holt wrote that the NAS officials informed him they recently released a draft copy of the report to the FBI and that, consequently, the FBI gave the panel “an additional 500 pages of previously undisclosed investigative material from the Amerithrax investigation.
• Holt has long challenged the FBI’s investigation, as well as its decision to close the investigation in February by releasing a 92-page case summary that left many of his constituents’ questions unanswered.

read Megan’s entire article at … http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=113548

******

Scott Shane wrote in the NYT (12/9/10) …

E. William Colglazier, the NAS’s executive officer, said the F.B.I.’s request was a surprise and came after the bureau saw the panel’s peer-reviewed final report, which was scheduled for release in November.

He said the committee’s 15 members, top scientists who serve as volunteers, were “exhausted,” but that the panel agreed to extend the study and consider revising the report in return for an additional fee, probably about $50,000, beyond the $879,550 the F.B.I. has already paid for the study.

read Scott’s entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/us/10anthrax.html?hpw

******

Anthony Kimery wrote in HS Today (12/9/10) …

Since the NAS’s investigation began, most of the meetings have been closed to the public. The last meeting that took place on June 2 in Washington, DC was advertised as an open meeting on a NAS website, but it was “closed in its entirety,” the Committee’s website shows.

According to another NAS website, however, “in accordance with federal law and with few exceptions, information-gathering meetings of the committee are open to the public, and any written materials provided to the committee by individuals who are not officials, agents, or employees of the National Academies are maintained in a public access file that is available for examination.”

Only the Committee’s deliberative meetings are “closed to the public in order to develop draft findings and recommendations free from outside influences,” NAS says, adding “the public is provided with brief summaries of these meetings that include the list of committee members present. All analyses and drafts of the report remain confidential.”

******

LMW COMMENT …

There is a fascinating story growing here about the interaction between the FBI and the NAS. The reporting of Scott Shane and Megan Eckstein suggests the following questions …

• what were the original documents given to the NAS by the FBI? why were these later documents withheld, and why are they being given to the NAS now?
• why weren’t these documents, and others provided to NAS from other sources, made available to the public during the study, as apparently required by law?
• what aspects of the NAS draft report did the FBI object to?
• is the original NAS draft report discoverable under federal law?
• why has the NAS failed to follow its own rules in disclosing information received and meeting summaries?
• what is different about the new documents? why were they originally withheld by the FBI?
• what other documents will the FBI later come up with to continue to delay the issuance of an already late NAS report?
• why did the NAS “quietly” post the extension on their website and not say a word about it? What would have come out if they had made a public announcement and subjected themselves to questions?
• why are the NAS committee members “exhausted” and what sort of interactions and relationships have developed between the FBI and the NAS? Are they at each other’s throats? Has the FBI been harrassing the NAS panel?
• what do the NAS panel members know that is not allowed by the FBI to be included in the report?
• when the “official” report is finally filed, will individual members of the NAS panel speak out? Is this the real reason for the FBI delay in issuing  the report?
• will Director Mueller meet with Congressman Holt?

When public officials behave in suspicious ways, it is natural that suspicions abound. It is unlikely that we will know the answers to these questions, but maybe, if the reporters dig enough and perhaps get lucky …

I come back to my three options as to what is really going on …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

 

 

 

* who benefitted from the FBI failure to solve the 2001 anthrax mailings case? … first to benefit … the Bush/Cheney plan to invade Iraq

Secretary of State Colin Powell waving a vial of "anthrax" at the UN on Feb 5, 2003

******

on February 5, 2003, Secretary of State  Colin Powell

addressed the United Nations Security Council …

• One of the most worrisome things that emerges from the thick intelligence file we have on Iraq’s biological weapons is the existence of mobile production facilities used to make biological agents.
  • In a matter of months, they can produce a quantity of biological poison equal to the entire amount that Iraq claimed to have produced in the years prior to the Gulf War.
  • “…  a fourth source, an Iraqi major, who defected, confirmed that Iraq has mobile biological research laboratories, in addition to the production facilities I mentioned earlier.
• “Ladies and gentlemen, these are sophisticated facilities. For example, they can produce anthrax.
  • In fact, they can produce enough dry biological agent in a single month to kill thousands upon thousands of people. And dry agent of this type is the most lethal form for human beings.
• “The Iraqi regime has also developed ways to disburse lethal biological agents, widely and discriminately into the water supply, into the air in ways that can cause massive death and destruction.
• “Let me talk now about the systems Iraq is developing to deliver weapons of mass destruction, in particular Iraq’s ballistic missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs.
• “There is ample evidence that Iraq has dedicated much effort to developing and testing spray devices that could be adapted for UAVs.

“… Leaving Saddam Hussein

in possession of weapons of mass destruction

for a few more months or years is not an option,

not in a post-September 11th world.”

NOTE: 6 weeks later, Iraq was invaded

******

LMW COMMENT …

• This was perhaps Colin Powell’s worst moment in an otherwise distinguished career. Virtually none of what he said at the UN turned out to be true. Saddam had no anthrax, no means to make anthrax, and no means to deliver anthrax to the US.
• But making us afraid that he did was one of the important false props in the Bush/Cheney false case for invading Iraq.
• If the FBI had by  then (which was 15 months after the anthrax attacks) solved the case, and it wasn’t Saddam, at least one of these false props would have disappeared, and perhaps we would never have invaded Iraq.

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt.

So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

It is this third scenario that leads me to try to show

who might have benefitted from not solving the case.

I am making no accusations,

but it is surely appropriate in an unsolved case

to look at those who might want to keep it unsolved.

******

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 perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******