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

Archive for December 13th, 2010

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

Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 13, 2010

 

******

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 *

******

 

Advertisements

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