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

Archive for December, 2010

* Microbial Forensics … Chapter 30 … Nonbiological measurements on Biological Agents … Stephan P. Velsko

Posted by DXer on December 11, 2010

******

if the estimated silicon concentrations in the Amerithrax spores are correct,
they are not consistent with our current understanding of silica deposition
or those materials must have indeed been produced under an unusual set
of conditions. If the latter were true, the silica evidence might provide a significant
bound on the credible growth and production scenarios that would be
consistent with the prosecution narrative in this case

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 27 Comments »

* DXer: John Ezzell forthrightly (to my way of thinking, heroically) answered all my questions relating to the DARPA research in which Flask 1029 (the “murder weapon” to borrow US Attorney Taylor’s term) was used to make a dried powder Ames aerosol.

Posted by DXer on December 10, 2010

******

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxaJwDGF-Ks

******

from DXer …

John Ezzell forthrightly (to my way of thinking, heroically) answered all my questions relating to the DARPA research in which Flask 1029 (the “murder weapon” to borrow US Attorney Taylor’s term) was used to make a dried powder Ames aerosol. It was for mass spectrometry detection work. The product was even purer than the Daschle product. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxaJwDGF-Ks
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/12/07/fbi-anthrax-expert-answers-questions-at-washington-seminar/

The research involved testing the effect of a sonicator and corona plasma discharge on Ames spores.

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/the-fbis-anthrax-expert-made-dried-powder-for-darpa-funded-researchers-who-were-examining-the-effect-of-corona-plasma-discharge-on-the-ames-spores/

The DARPA researchers thanked John Ezzell and Terry Abshire for their help and facilities.

It was Terry Abshire who selected the morphs later thought so important by the FBI science team.
Trail of Odd Anthrax Cells Led FBI to Army Scientist …
Oct 27, 2008 … In late October 2001, lab technician Terry Abshire placed a tray of … These were mutants, or “morphs,” genetic deviants scattered among …
http://www.washingtonpost.com

Despite the researcher’s good faith, didn’t they have a conflict of interest that hopelessly tainted the evidence?

When that lab then threw out Dr. Ivins first sample, the loss of that sample could not possibly fairly be construed as evidence of Dr. Ivins’ guilt. Yet that is what the Amerithrax scientists did even though the emails show the written protocols were not sent to Ivins’ lab until May 24, 2002 (contrary to the claims by the Amerithrax science officials at the press conference and contrary to the February 2010 Amerithrax Summary).

That’s just really messed up.

Now FBI Director Mueller is a brilliant and hardworking and very principled man. He can understand this and can watch as Dr. Ezzell answers the questions posed. FBI Director Mueller needs to reopen Amerithrax before the end of his 10 year term because these facts are not going away. The FBI is not the only one who makes secret audiotapes.

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 241 Comments »

* Congressman Holt’s letter to FBI Director Mueller: ” … 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 …”

Posted by DXer on December 10, 2010

Congressman Rush Holt seems to be the only one who can give Dr. Bruce Ivins a chance at posthumous redemption

******

Holt Questions Last Minute FBI Efforts to Influence

NAS Scientific Review of “Amerithrax” Case

******

December 9, 2010

Dear Director Mueller,

I have long been troubled by the FBI’s investigation and final conclusions to the 2001 Anthrax attacks. This week more disturbing information has come to my attention.

As you know, in September 2008, the FBI requested that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to examine a relatively narrow range of scientific questions about the FBI’s scientific conclusions in the so-called “Amerithrax” case. Recently, the NAS shared their draft report with the FBI for review.

This week I was informed by the NAS that the FBI would be releasing an additional 500 pages of previously undisclosed investigative material from the Amerithrax investigation to the NAS.

My understanding is that this document dump, taking place after the FBI’s review of the NAS draft report, is intended to contest and challenge the independent NAS panel’s draft findings.

If these new documents were relevant to the NAS’s review why were they previously undisclosed and withheld?

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.

Sincerely,

RUSH HOLT

Member of Congress

******

LMW COMMENT …

Could it possibly be more obvious that the FBI is hiding the truth in the anthrax letters case?

Even the NAS panel, hired by the FBI and restricted by them in ways that were always questionable, could not be allowed to tell the truth the way they saw it.

The FBI’s conduct in this matter from the very beginning has been unprofessional. There is no way anyone should have confidence in anything the FBI has to say about this matter.

President Obama should remove Director Mueller from his position and appoint someone who will tell the truth to the American people.

******

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 *


******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 13 Comments »

* Congressman Holt finds the FBI’s request for revision of the completed NAS report “disturbing”

Posted by DXer on December 9, 2010

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

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has requested a last-minute delay in the release of a report on the bureau’s anthrax investigation by the National Academy of Sciences, prompting a congressman to say the bureau “may be seeking to try to steer or otherwise pressure” the academy’s scientific panel “to reach a conclusion desired by the bureau.”

Representative Rush D. Holt, Democrat of New Jersey and a physicist who has often been critical of the investigation, made the remarks in a letter Thursday to the F.B.I.’s director, Robert S. Mueller III, saying that he found the bureau’s request for a delay “disturbing.”

The F.B.I. has told the committee that it wants to turn over an additional 500 pages of investigative documents not provided previously, despite the committee’s request for all relevant material when it began the review in April 2009.

“If these new documents were relevant to the N.A.S.’s review why were they previously undisclosed and withheld?” Mr. Holt wrote.

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 the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/us/10anthrax.html?hpw

******

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 *

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 7 Comments »

* HS Today’s Anthony Kimerly (Homeland Security Insight and Analysis) reports… NAS report delayed again … CASE CLOSED blog cited

Posted by DXer on December 9, 2010

FBI looms over the NAS

******

Anthony Kimerly, writing in HS Today … Homeland Security Insight and Analysis (12/9/10) …

SCIENCE REPORT ON FBI ANTHRAX PROBE DELAYED AGAIN

  • The investigation was supposed to take 18 months, with a final report expected last October 24.
  • NAS had stated on its website that the report would be ready in “Fall 2010.”
  • But NAS quietly announced in a website notice Tuesday that “the project duration has been extended,” and that “the report is expected to be issued in February 2011.”
  • Under its contract with the FBI, the NAS Committee on Science, Technology, and Law is to “conduct an independent review of the scientific approaches used during the investigation of the 2001 Bacillus anthracis (B. anthracis) mailings.
  • Under the terms of the NAS contract with the FBI, NAS is not permitted to draw any conclusions regarding the guilt or innocence of anyone considered a person of interest by the FBI.
  • Since the NAS’s investigation began, most of the meetings of the Committee on Science, Technology, and Law 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.”

CASE CLOSED blog cited …

  • “The NAS now says the report is expected to be issued in February 2011. I’ll believe it when I see it, and when there finally is a report. How likely is it that NAS will say only what the FBI approves or directs,” said Lew Weinstein, a longtime critic of the FBI’s investigation. Weinstein is the former president and CEO of Public Health Research Institute, a biomedical research organization focused on infectious disease research.
  • Weinstein raised the issue of the closed meetings last April when he asked “what’s going on with the NAS anthrax study … almost all sessions have been closed, with no agendas, lists of witness, or summary reports? Will we ever learn what they have been doing?”
  • He said Wednesday that “NAS has treated the public in a totally disparagingly arrogant manner. Promising to be open and transparent, they have been precisely the opposite. Promising to consider input, they have never sought any, and have had few open sessions when anyone could offer any. Committed to a deadline, they ignore it. Asked about when the report will be issued, they first give a date they do not meet and then don’t even bother to answer the question. Now they give a new date, without giving any reason for the delay.”
  • In October, Weinstein had complained that NAS “has withheld all the documents produced to it by the FBI, conducting its entire study in a level of secrecy that matches the way the FBI has informed us of the details of its investigation … how infuriating this should be for any American who wants to believe that the government we support is actually working on our behalf.”

GAO review at Congressman Holt’s request

  • Meanwhile, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is investigating the scientific and technical methods used by the FBI during its investigation at the request of Rep. Rush Holt, in whose central New Jersey district the anthrax letters are believed to have originated from a postal box, killing five.
  • At Holt’s request, “GAO will take a much broader approach in examining the scientific underpinnings of the FBI’s investigation,” he said.
  • “The American people need credible answers to many questions raised by the original attacks and the subsequent FBI handling of the case,” Holt said. “I’m pleased the GAO has responded to our request and will look into the scientific methods used by the FBI.”
  • “In the wake of this bungled FBI investigation, all of us – but especially the families of the victims of the anthrax attacks – deserve credible answers about how the attacks happened and whether the case really is closed,” Holt said in September when he announced GAO was investigating.
  • Last July, following a meeting with the NAS committee, Holt said “simply stated, our government – and specifically, the FBI – suffers from a credibility gap on this issue.

******

Anthony Kimerly

… Kimerly is the Online Editor/Senior Reporter and HSToday eNewsletter Editor … he is a respected award-winning editor and journalist who has covered national and global security, intelligence and defense issues for two decades.

read the entire excellent article at …http://www.hstoday.us/content/view/15683/149/

.

.

.

.

LMW COMMENT …

Well, perhaps our longstanding attention to the FBI’s failed anthrax investigation and the NAS failure to operate openly and on time as they promised is beginning to get some attention. Thank you Anthony Kimerly.

Thanks also to Ken Dillion and the University of California for sponsoring and organizing the recent anthrax seminar which has been instrumental in generating this renewed attention to an important and unresolved national security issue.

see a report on that seminar at … * Amerithrax experts insist FBI has failed to prove beyond many reasonable doubts that Dr. Bruce Ivins was even involved in the anthrax mailings, let alone the sole perpetrator … is there more evidence against Ivins that the FBI has not released? has the FBI actually failed to solve the case? or does the FBI know who really did it (not Ivins) but does not want to reveal the true perpetrators?

******

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 *

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 14 Comments »

* the NAS anthrax project duration has been extended … the NAS now says the report is expected to be issued in February 2011 … I’ll believe it when I see it … and when there finally is a report, how likely is it that NAS will say only what the FBI approves or directs

Posted by DXer on December 8, 2010

FBI looms over the NAS

******

Bugmaster points out that

the GAO scientific review is not supposed to start

until the NAS study has concluded!

Thus there is delay after delay,

with the FBI hoping that sooner or later nobody will care

about the debacle they have made of the anthrax investigation.

see …

* the National Academy of Sciences has withheld all the documents produced to it by the FBI, conducting its entire study in a level of secrecy that matches the way the FBI has informed us of the details of its investigation … how infuriating this should be for any American who wants to believe that the government we support is actually working on our behalf

* 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

* NAS continues to participate in the FBI’s stonewalling efforts to keep the truth about the 2001 anthrax attacks away from public scrutiny

* NAS announces committee to review FBI’s anthrax science

* details of the proposed NAS-FBI $880,000 study are (so far) difficult to come by

 

******

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/cp/projectview.aspx?key=49105

The NAS site now says …

“Update 12/7/10: The project duration has been extended. The report is expected to be issued in February 2011.”

That’s it. No reasons given.

******

LMW COMMENT …

I’ll believe it when I see it.

The NAS has treated the public in a totally disparaging arrogant manner. Promising to be open and transparent, they have been precisely the opposite. Promising to consider input, they have never sought any, and have had few open sessions when anyone could offer any. Committed to a deadline, they ignore it. Asked about when the report will be issued, they first give a date they do not meet and then don’t even bother to answer the question. Now they give a new date, without giving any reason for the delay.

Who are we to think we deserve more?

The American taxpayers, who are funding this study, are treated without any consideration, as the enemies, which I guess we have to believe we are. The NAS is acting like it is totally under the thumb of its sponsor the FBI. How can anyone ever believe they will render an independent report? It seems far more likely they will say only what the FBI approves or directs. $1,000,000 down the drain!

******

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 *

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 7 Comments »

* FBI now admits the silicon concentration in the attack anthrax is too high … higher than can be explained by natural occurrence.

Posted by DXer on December 7, 2010

Microbial Forensics, Second Edition

Bruce Budowle (Editor), Steven E. Schutzer (Editor), Roger G. Breeze (Editor), Paul S. Keim (Editor), Stephen A. Morse (Editor)

The second edition of the treatise has just been released

and contains some startling admissions.

The silicon concentration of the Amerithrax spores, long downplayed by the FBI as a “natural occurrence” has finally been discussed in detail.

The FBI scientists finally admit that the concentration of the element silicon found in the attack spores is too high – higher than can be explained by natural occurrence.

Interestingly, the high silicon concentration was discussed in a Wall Street Journal aricle by Ed Epstein:

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/01/25/epstein-wsj-1-24-10-the-fbi-says-ivins-was-the-sole-perpetrator-but-it-has-presented-no-evidence-to-support-that-conclusion-and-the-largest-case-in-fbi-history-is-still-open/

Ed Epstein’s article was disputed days later by FBI lab director Chris Hassell (although he gave no real explanation ahy he was disputing it):

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/02/04/fbi-disputes-epsteins-wsj-opinion-piece/

Now things seem to have taken a complete 180 and the new book Microbial Forensics, basically agrees with Ed Epstein’s original article – which stated that the silicon concentration was too high and was not a “natural occurence”.

The book even goes as far as to state that

the high silicon content would have provided a serious problem

had any case against Dr Ivins have gone to court –

it would have affected the “prosecution narrative”.

Quote (from page 513):

“Thus if the estimates silicon concentrations in the Amerithrax spores are correct, they are not consistent with our current understanding of silica deposition or those materials must have indeed been produced under an unusual set of conditions. If the latter were true, the silica evidence might provide a significant bound on the credible growth and production scenarios that would be consistent with the prosecution narrative in this case.

  • Although this is a good step forward by the FBI, they appear to be still downplaying the NYP silicon concentration.
  • The AFIP lab report is still not mentioned nor is the >30% silicon content that is found in that sample.

******

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 *

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 39 Comments »

* Amerithrax experts insist FBI has failed to prove beyond many reasonable doubts that Dr. Bruce Ivins was even involved in the anthrax mailings, let alone the sole perpetrator … is there more evidence against Ivins that the FBI has not released? has the FBI actually failed to solve the case? or does the FBI know who really did it (not Ivins) but does not want to reveal the true perpetrators?

Posted by DXer on December 7, 2010

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp, Dr. James Van de Velde at the Anthrax Mailings Investigation seminar ... UC Washington Center Nov 29, 2010

******

VIDEOS ON YOU TUBE

Thanks to Cliff Kincaid (www.usasurvival.org) for recording the videos

“Case Closed” Author Lew Weinstein Discusses FBI Anthrax Cover-up and Possible Al-Qaeda … Involvementhttp://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/4/4zI69unuq6A

Attorney Paul Kemp says FBI falsely blamed Bruce Ivins for anthrax attacks (1 of 3) …             http://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/3/V-yXpr6dV_w

Attorney Paul Kemp says FBI falsely blamed Bruce Ivins for anthrax attacks (2 of 3). …  http://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/2/yWseM_R-V5Q

Attorney Paul Kemp says FBI falsely blamed Bruce Ivins for anthrax attacks (3 of 3) …  http://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/1/L1WGrP3PQEo

UCLA’s Michael Intriligator Says FBI either incompetent or corrupt in anthrax investigation…  http://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/0/Cn36y4fPVlg

Megan Eckstein writes in the Frederick News Post (11/30/10) …

WASHINGTON — The FBI may have closed its Amerithax case against Fort Detrick scientist Bruce Ivins nine months ago, but some experts are not willing to let the issue die quite so easily.

A group of about 25 scientists, professors, writers, terrorism experts and more convened Monday afternoon to discuss the particulars of the investigation and to debate who the real perpetrator may have been.

Lewis Weinstein, who has written extensively about the anthrax attacks in 2001 that killed five and sickened 17 others, introduced the first panel of speakers by saying “none of us on this panel believe the FBI proved its case against Dr. Bruce Ivins.”

Though each speaker came from a different perspective and had different opinions on the real killer, Weinstein said they wanted to address the group Monday “to continue to keep this case alive so someday Americans can know who committed this bioterrorism attack.”

The first panelist to speak was Paul Kemp, Ivins’ attorney since 2007, whose nearly 25 minute presentation could have been the opening argument to the trial that never took place — Kemp’s client committed suicide in July 2008 as the FBI investigation was closing in on Ivins.

“There is no evidence that Dr. Ivins ever made the dried anthrax” used in the attacks, Kemp said. “There were no spores found in his house, in his car, at his desk, any place that it shouldn’t have been.”

Because the attack anthrax was never found on Ivins’ property and because his DNA was never found on the attack letters, critics of the FBI investigation said the final report released in February is nothing more than a laundry list of circumstantial evidence strung together to make Ivins appear mentally unstable and, therefore, guilty.

Kemp argued back with his own list of reasons why Ivins did not appear guilty. Ivins talked openly in front of a grand jury twice in 2007 without legal representation, implying he did not think he had anything to hide. Ivins always insisted Steven Hatfill, who was originally considered a “person of interest” and later cleared of any involvement in the attacks, was innocent, whereas a guilty person would have taken advantage of having a scapegoat. And the FBI found nothing suggesting Ivins’ guilt on his home computer, which investigators admitted had not been tampered with in any way.

Meryl Nass, a doctor who has also written extensively about the Amerithrax investigation, followed by listing and discounting each of the FBI’s means, motive and opportunity for Ivins to have committed the crime.

“We don’t know if he had access to the equipment and the knowledge because we don’t know what knowledge and equipment were required,” she said of the FBI’s inability to pinpoint how the anthrax was prepared. “”Did he have a motive? The FBI comes up with several purported motives, but none of them make sense. É Did Bruce have the opportunity to commit the crime? The scenario the FBI initially floated about how he might have driven to New Jersey to mail the letters was shot down and they never came up with a better story.”

James Van de Velde, a consultant on terrorism issues, added that Ivins, as a prominent anthrax researcher, would not have been dumb enough to use anthrax from his own beaker in an attack.

And Ross Getman, a lawyer and author on the subject, said the FBI changed its timeline of when the letters would have had to be mailed to fit Ivins’ calendar, which has not been released. Getman asserted that Ivins had group therapy sessions scheduled for the two days the FBI originally thought the letters were mailed.

In an interesting turn of events, John Ezzell, who was mentioned several times during the first panel discussion, was sitting in the audience. Ezzell was an anthrax researcher at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases with Ivins. He personally handled the anthrax letters in 2001 when the FBI asked USAMRIID to help identify the powder inside.

Because of his involvement in the investigation, Ezzell had been under a gag order until he recently retired from USAMRIID. In what he said was his first time speaking out about the issue, Ezzell stood up toward the end of the panel’s presentation to address a question. When those in the room realized a true expert was among them, audience members and panelists tossed question after question his way.

“I think it is very valuable for you to have come forward,” said Kemp, Ivins’ lawyer. “This kind of open, forthcoming information É this is the kind of thing that should have been going on since August of 2008 at the very least.”

“Dr. Ezzell, obviously you’ve retired now, so now you can speak out, and now you can provide this kind of information, and that’s all I’ve ever wanted on behalf of Dr. Ivins,” Kemp said.

Despite some strong opinions from the panelists and audience members, the seminar itself never drew any conclusions as to Ivins’ guilt or who the real attacker could have been. When Van de Velde asked Ezzell if he thought Ivins could have done it, Ezzell responded with a hesitant “possibly yes.”

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=113107

******

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 *


 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 69 Comments »

* Dr. John Ezzell, the FBI’s anthrax expert, attended a recent conference on the anthrax mailings … his comments answered some questions and raised others

Posted by DXer on December 7, 2010

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp, Dr. James Van de Velde at the Anthrax Mailings Investigation seminar ... UC Washington Center Nov 29, 2010

******

see Lew’s seminar interview on You Tube

“Case Closed” Author Lew Weinstein Discusses FBI Anthrax Cover-up and Possible Al-Qaeda …Involvementhttp://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/4/4zI69unuq6A

******

Dr. John Ezzell, the FBI’s anthrax expert,

and formerly Dr. Bruce Ivins’ colleague at USAMRIID,

shown above speaking at the anthrax mailings seminar.

His comments answered some questions and raised others

******

DXer has assembled the following points from documents produced by the FBI and from Dr. Ezzell’s comments at the conference and in past correspondence  …

  1. Dr. Ezzell made dried powdered anthrax using Ames supplied by Bruce Ivins (which had been irradiated in the slurry).
  2. his resulting dry powder was more pure than the Daschle product.
  3. he made it at the request of DARPA for testing of mass spectrometry for biodefense detection purposes.
  4. The work Dr. Ezzell did was done in Building 1412 at USAMRIID.
  5. The virulent Ames was kept in the unlocked refrigerator.
  6. The aerosol samples were put on tapes.
  7. The DARPA researchers were testing the effect of a sonicator and corona plasma discharge on Ames spores.
  8. In 2001 (and for a couple of years after that), Dr. Ivins had not known that dried powdered anthrax was being made at USAMRIID.

from which DXer asks the following questions …

Question #1: When was the dried powder created?

Question #2: Might the renografin Dr. Ezzell used create a Silicon Signature?

Question #3: Would traces of renografin be found (if it had been used in the mailed anthrax)?

Question #4: Is it correct that no traces of renografin were found?

Question #5: What is the effect of a corona plasma discharge on Ames spores? Would it create a unipolar charge?

Question #6: What is the effect of a sonicator?

Question #7: Besides Building 1412 and Johns-Hopkins, where else was the research involving a sonicator and corona plasma discharge done?

******

Sources: audiotape and videotape of Dr. Ezzell’s question and answer (link will be posted as soon as available)

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/91_1.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-08-at-8-54-20-am.png

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/83_aaa_jhapl_4.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/aaa_clues.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/aaa_ezzell_rev_rev_rev.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/aaa_casebook_rev.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-07-at-3-52-07-pm.png

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-07-at-3-52-23-pm.png

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-07-at-3-53-57-pm.png

******

******

******

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 *

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 47 Comments »

* Bio Prep Watch reports on anthrax seminar … Colleagues defend Ivins’ innocence

Posted by DXer on December 7, 2010

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp and Dr. James Van de Velde at the November 29 anthrax seminar sponsored by the University of California Institute for Global Conflict and Cooperation and the UC Washington Center

******


Pat Dulnier of BioPrepWatch.com reports (12/6) …

  • Former U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease researcher John Ezzell and attorney Paul Kemp recently made detailed statements about the 2001 anthrax case that affected 17 people and killed five.
  • The statements, made during a seminar at the University of California’s Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, come nine months after the FBI closed its case on the Amerithrax investigation, the Frederick News-Post reports.
  • The innocence of accused scientist, Bruce Ivins, who died in 2008 from an intentional Tylenol PM overdose, has been debated by experts who do not believe the evidence against the Fort Detrick employee proves his guilt.
  • The seminar was the first time that these experts had gathered to share their theories and knowledge.
  • Ivins’ attorney Paul Kemp made a statement about confusion between Ivins and the FBI that the latter used to damage Ivins’ case.
  • According to Kemp, the FBI damaged the original sample of anthrax that Ivins had sent.

http://www.bioprepwatch.com/news/223066-colleagues-defend-ivins-innocence

******

LMW COMMENT …

Congratulations to seminar organizer Ken Dillon and to the University of California IGCC and UC Washington Center for their role in keeping this case alive. The FBI doesn’t want this discussion to go on, but it is in the interests of our nation that it does.

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