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

* Lew’s interview will be available on archive from the radio station

Posted by DXer on February 8, 2011

Lew Weinstein, author of CASE CLOSED


I am told that yesterday’s interview

will be available

in about one week.

I’ll post the information as soon as I have it.



21 Responses to “* Lew’s interview will be available on archive from the radio station”

  1. DXer said

    “We’ve put a copy of the report in our document viewer, where you can browse or search for details.”

  2. DXer said

    Brian Patrick Roach, 64, allegedly demanded US$4 million (about R29.3 million) from British officials to not unleash an apparent biological attack (foot-and-mouth) on the United Kingdom. He did not have the means to carry out his threat.

  3. DXer said

    U.S. Counterterror Chief: “Dirty Bomb” as Much a Risk as Biological Weapon

    Friday, Feb. 11, 2011
    By Elaine M. Grossman
    WASHINGTON — A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said yesterday the risk of an attack against the nation using a “dirty bomb” might be as high as that of a potential terror strike involving a biological weapon (see GSN, Feb. 10).

    (Feb. 11) – Police officers wearing hazard materials protection suits secure an area during a 2004 exercise simulating a radiological “dirty bomb” strike at the Port of Los Angeles. A dirty-bomb attack against the United States might be as likely as a biological-weapon strike, the head of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center said yesterday (David McNew/Getty Images).

    The danger of al-Qaeda or other terrorists “obtaining a biological weapon is more likely than obtaining or producing a yield-producing nuclear device,” said Michael Leiter. He added, though, that in his view, “the likelihood of [their] using a radiological device that doesn’t have [a nuclear explosive] yield might be equally high.”

    A dirty bomb would use conventional explosives to disperse radioactive materials, potentially claiming lives and contaminating an area surrounding the detonation for years. Such a device would be less destructive than a traditional nuclear weapon, but could be much easier for a terrorist to construct and might still have devastating economic and health consequences.

    Leiter directs the National Counterterrorism Center, which is responsible for integrating and analyzing nearly all intelligence related to the threat of terror attacks. The NCTC head reports to both the U.S. president and the national intelligence director.

    Testifying before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Leiter said that members of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula — based largely in Yemen — have shown interest in both chemical weapons and biological devices, such as those capable of spreading anthrax or another potentially lethal pathogen.

    He said this and other al-Qaeda affiliates’ level of intention to obtain biological, chemical or radiological weapons remains “high,” particularly in Pakistan and Yemen (see GSN, Feb. 10).

    Nonetheless, the prospect of conventional terror strikes looms larger for the United States and its allies than attacks employing a weapon of mass destruction.

    “Although there is a huge consequence” involved in any WMD attack, Leiter said, “I do think that the smaller-scale, lone-wolf attack with conventional weapons still stands out as a far more likely event.”

    A congressionally chartered commission in late 2008 concluded that “unless the world community acts decisively and with great urgency, it is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013” (see GSN, Dec. 1, 2008).

    Headed by former Senators Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Jim Talent (R-Mo.), the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism determined that terrorists could more easily obtain and use a biological weapon than a nuclear bomb.

    Central Intelligence Agency Director Leon Panetta said the possibility that terrorists might acquire a nuclear weapon tends to garner the most attention because of the potentially catastrophic scale of such an attack.

    “But I have to tell you, from an intelligence point of view, we see more and more that al-Qaeda continues to look at [the] possibility” of employing biological weapons, he said.


    However, a recent issue of “Inspire,” an al-Qaeda magazine, mentioned continued interest in employing anthrax in a terror strike, officials have said (see GSN, Feb. 4). This latest development comes after several years of reports that elements of the terror organization have discussed and at times experimented with unconventional weapons (see GSN, March 18, 2010).

    Also sitting on the same witness panel yesterday was National Intelligence Director James Clapper, who called the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction a “major concern.”

  4. DXer said

    Note that FOIA should apply to the documents produced by the FBI to NAS. There should be no charge for the documents under the criterion. The documents should be treated in the same way as past FBI productions where they were uploaded.

    I hope the FBI agrees. They tend to do a good job in organizing documents online.

    In case they don’t upload these documents, we each should consider what friend we have in DC who might help with the logistics of quickly getting the documents and emailing pdfs to people. I would be glad to upload documents in prompt order if the FBI/NAS does not.

    If anyone knows the best method or technology, let me know.

    Similarly, if anyone knows a nonprofit that would host the documents and pay for copying, if not uploaded, that would be another idea.

  5. DXer said

    Where was the research on the corona plasma discharge and sonicator on Ames spores supplied by Bruce Ivins conducted for DARPA? Anywhere else? Where were aerosol studies done using dried powder?

  6. DXer said

    When did SRI first obtain virulent Ames and from whom?

  7. DXer said

    Who was Dr. Ivins corresponding with about Ames spores who was going to Arlington to speak to DARPA?

    Relateldy, did the FBI’s anthrax expert JE who made the dried aerosol using 40 ml from Flask 1029 disclose the method of his processing to the other DARPA researchers?

  8. DXer said

    Ivins notes that the original researcher who obtained the slants from Texas came to work for the CIA. When did he start working for the CIA?

  9. DXer said

    What happened to the other slant sent from Texas?

  10. DXer said

    Why did the FBI never disclose the email withheld for 2 years that shows Dr. Ivins knew that 5 ml of virulent Ames had been taken from Building 1412?

  11. DXer said

    Why did the FBI let USAMRIID General John Parker’s false claim that USAMRIID did not make dried powder stand when the FBI and the scientists overseeing the investigation knew its own expert had made dried powdered aerosol using Ames? The making of dried powder using Flask 1029 and its presence in the unlocked refrigerator in Building 1412 is highly relevant to analysis. 40 ml was withdrawn in August 2000 for the DARPA research.

  12. DXer said

    Why didn’t the FBI disclose that the photocopy mentioned in the Amerithrax Summary could be excluded as the source of the Amerithrax letters based on the toner — and not merely the track marks?

  13. DXer said

    The evidence relating to the Federal Eagle stamp is highly relevant and should have been addressed by the NAS. Why did US Attorney and AP create the impression that the Federal Eagle stamp was uniquely sold in Ivins’ post office (near USAMRIID) when it in fact was sold throughout Maryland and Virginia?

  14. DXer said

    A relevant fact highly pertinent to his reason for being in the lab is how long it would take. The pertinent 302 interview statement that checking the health of the animals typically would take 2 hours and was a one person job. And he was tending to both mice and guinea pigs.

    • DXer said

      In contrast to a central tenet relied upon by US Attorney Taylor in explaining Ivins’ overtime in Fall 2001, including November and December, the 2-person rule that in 2002 precluded such overtime.

  15. DXer said

    An example of admissible evidence is Lab Notebook 4010 which the FBI has withheld.

  16. DXer said

    Here is the latest pronouncement by an FBI expert on the question of attribution and the anthrax mailings of Fall 2001 — from November 29, 2010.

    • anonymous said

      At the end he is asked “Dr Ezzell, could Al Qaeda have done this?”

      Dr Ezzell replies: “Sure, I mean, why not?”

      • DXer said

        Here are all 3 videos. (sorry, one will be repeat of above).

        It’s important to appreciate that nothing in what Dr. E says undermines in any way the excellent comment by MHJ, BHR or SJ filed with the NAS. But it is of blockbuster importance that the FBI anthrax expert made a dried aerosol out of Flask 1029 — and it was kept tippy top secret by the FBI scientists who then did all sorts of back flips trying to spin things based on speculation, surmise and innuendo. They might instead have started with the facts established by the documentary evidence.

  17. Old Atlantic said

    Looking forward to hearing it. Also this

    Just having negative interactions with law enforcement leads to suicide. This is even without a conviction.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: