* who benefited from the 2001 anthrax attacks? … $50 billion to the biodefense industry … > $6 billion for biodefense research and facilities
Posted by DXer on December 30, 2010
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.
******
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 *
******
CASE CLOSED ... what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks? 
Quize Moto said
Bayer the manufacturer of Cipro benefited from the tainted letters by 9.5 billion dollars plus.
“On October 24 2002, the Bush Administration (2002–2009) announced a deal between the government and Bayer Pharmaceuticals to purchase 100 million tablets of ciprofloxacin at a reduced price of $0.95 per pill. A full course of ciprofloxacin for post-exposure prophylaxis (60 days) resulting from this arrangement costs the government $204 per person treated, compared with $12 per person treated with doxycycline the drug normally used to treat anthrax, a difference of $192.” (Ciprofloxacin, Wikipedia).
Bayer’s patent protection for Cipro was due to expire in early 2003.
DXer said
Old Atlantic said
On this thread, as I understand it, you want us to consider the assumptions you have stated. We are not responsible for those assumptions but take them as given. I think this is a worthwhile and important activity.
The Dugway fermentor is at this point the most likely source of the letter anthrax. If its runs are recorded, then they should be published.
If Battelle or other sites that had RMR-1029 have a fermentor, their fermentor runs should be published.
We should also know who had access to the fermentor, their actual names. To find out what happened now, the secrecy stage is long past. This is now the point where we need a full Warren Commission type report, the massive volumes that list everything.
Old Atlantic said
As we discussed before, the FOIA was intended as a permanent Warren Commission. But too much is removed from these reports. Sorry for those who want anonymity, but we need to have peoples names revealed. If TSA can grope people who are unlikely to be terrorists, then we can get the names of those who worked with the fermentor or others.
We are at the stage of a public inquiry into what happened. That means people come forward and testify. When you witness a crime, you have to testify with your own name.
DXer said
“The Dugway fermentor is at this point the most likely source of the letter anthrax. If its runs are recorded, then they should be published.”
The Dugway fermentor is in Utah. If and to the extent the isotope analysis is credited, Dugway is excluded by reason of the anthrax having been determined to have been grown in the United States. (There may be difficulty in arriving at any conclusion based on isotopes due to the variables but that is for the NAS to figure out). The swath of isotopes that characterizes the Northeast based on the principal elements studied is like a ribbon and the same range does extend westward in a ribbon but does not include Utah as I best recall. But perhaps it could be narrowed by considering other elements.
.
DXer said
As I recall the map of the United States picturing the ranges — provided on the website of the FBI’s water guy — the swath included Ann Arbor and St. Paul in addition to the areas conventionally thought of as the northeastern United States.
Old Atlantic said
“The Dugway fermentor is in Utah. If and to the extent the isotope analysis is credited, Dugway is excluded by reason of the anthrax having been determined to have been grown in the United States. ”
Utah is no longer in the United States. Good for them.
anonymous said
We already debunked isotopes at least a year ago. This was after an anonymous FBI source told Scott Shane that isotopes narrowed it to Detrick.
We demonstrated through peer reviewed papers that isotopes were useless to trace spores – given that the other chemicals needed to make anthrax completely skew the results.
After all this debunking was exposed in blogs Chris Hassell stated Scott Shane’s source was “mistaken”.
It looked like yet another junk science leak to implicate Ivins the FBI hoped they would get away with.
anonymous said
The isotope debunking can be read here:
http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2009/01/nyt-portrait-emerges-of-anthrax.html
Hassell denial is here:
http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-responds-to-science-issues-in-anthrax-case
The second item involves isotopic analysis of the mailed anthrax. Media reports indicated that FBI scientists had concluded in 2004 that out of many domestic and foreign water samples analyzed only water from near Fort Detrick, Maryland, where Dr. Ivins worked, had the same isotopic signature as the water used to grow the mailed anthrax. This statement is incorrect. While water isotopic analysis was researched, the FBI concluded that there were too many confounding variables to precisely match bacteria that were grown using different materials and recipes. This technique was not relevant to the investigation.
anonymous said
Incidentlly Hassell makes another nonsense statement at the link above:
The letter spores were dried spores, produced from two separate growth preparations as indicated by differences in the New York and Washington, D.C. mailings. Although the chemical fingerprint of the spores is interesting, given the variability involved in the growth process, it was not relevant to the investigation.
anonymous said
Just to clarify more on Dr Hassell’s junk science statement that the chemical signature is not relevant to the investigation.
The Livermore paper below shows that there is in fact a STRONG CORRELATION between elements grown in different media – in contrast to Hassell talking about the “variability” involved.
Click to access 333118.pdf
In other words – the FBI could not see a match between regular spores grown at Detrcik and the attack spores. So they pretended this is not important. This seems to be standard operating procedure for the FBI labs.
anonymous said
“That’s just more distorted information from Anonymous.”
Hardly. I wrote” Just to clarify more on Dr Hassell’s junk science statement that the chemical signature is not relevant to the investigation.”
I realize you deny words often exist. But the word “chemical” is included in that sentence in properly spelled English.
Chemical signatures have zero connection with genetic signatures. As usual, you are the one distorting things.
This is straight out of your usual playbook – find a reference (the Velsko paper) that does not support the FBI junk science and then distort the argument.