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

* Richard Rowley’s summary of the FBI’s “non-case” vs Dr. Bruce Ivins … why does the FBI continue to assert this unproven and probably unprovable case against a dead man who cannot defend himself?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on February 9, 2011


Richard Rowley’s summary of the FBI’s “non-case” …

To commit even the bare-boned Amerithrax crimes

(the media letters and the Senators Daschle and Leahy ones),

the perp(s) would have had to do the following :

  1. grow wet anthrax (ie get spores and culture them).
  2. dry them to a powder and purify to one degree or another.
  3. write (ie print) the originals of the two Amerithrax texts (media text and politician text). Print outside of envelope.
  4. photocopy each original text (likely done some days or weeks apart: first the media letters, then the politician letters).
  5. insert finished powder in fold of letters.
  6. go to Princeton, New Jersey some hours before the mail pickup at the mailbox just off campus.
  7. return home/to work from that mailbox in Princeton without anyone being the wiser.

So, how many of the above tasks do we KNOW

(from the government’s case against him)

that Ivins actually did in September and October of 2001?

One and only one …

1)grow wet anthrax (ie get spores and culture them).

We know that because THAT WAS (part of) HIS JOB!

And had been his job for 2 solid decades before Amerithrax.

All the rest in this case is commentary.

And that’s why the FINAL REPORT is so long and tedious:

a) since they don’t have evidence that Ivins printed the letters (his block printing was a non-match) the government finessed that in the usual way: graphological comparison ‘inconclusive’. Same with the polygraph test Ivins passed: results ‘inconclusive’ (I think it was Mister Lake who added the interesting twist that if suspect X passes a polygraph test centered on crimes A and B, then that PROVES the suspect is a ‘sociopath’ since they can lie cleverly and thus it is proof that suspect X actually committed crimes A and B! I would call this ‘Jesuitry’ but I think it gives even the Jesuits a bad rap!

b) since they don’t have evidence that Ivins drove to New Jersey at any time in September and October of 2001, they spend lots to time and space highlighting Ivins driving, over the years, long distances to OTHER TOWNS/STATES to check out chapters of Gamma Gamma Delta or to deliver gifts in such a way so as the recipient doesn’t know who the gift is from.

c)since they were unable to match any photocopier that Ivins would regularly use (due to proximity)to the Amerithrax letter copies, they use INNUENDO to imply that there’s a real possibility he used one at Fort Detrick. That’s the focus here, but it is part of a pattern: the FINAL REPORT glosses over anything and everything that is pointing in the direction of Ivins’ innocence (that is exculpatory) and via a cleverness that is facile but false implies many things it cannot prove.

d) there’s no evidence whatsoever that Ivins did ANY drying of wet anthrax in September or October of 2001 (or for that matter in any month of 2001). But that fact is buried amid nonsense about a ‘code’ etc.

e) they never found any spores in Ivins’ vehicle or residence. But that’s one of the dirty little secrets of the investigative dead end.



The FBI’s publicly presented 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?

As regular readers of this blog well know, 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


CASE CLOSED is a novel

about the FBI’s failed investigation

of the 2001 anthrax attacks


read the opening scene of CASE CLOSED …

* CASE CLOSED – opening scene … the DIA re-investigates the FBI’s failed case


* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *





7 Responses to “* Richard Rowley’s summary of the FBI’s “non-case” vs Dr. Bruce Ivins … why does the FBI continue to assert this unproven and probably unprovable case against a dead man who cannot defend himself?”

  1. Old Atlantic said

    The following article has a diagram showing a porous silicon based structure used to contain the cancer drug doxorubicin.

    See figure 1 page 2.

    Silica Si02 is used to contain doxorubicin. In figure 1, one can see that the porous silica structure has a large volume compared to the hollow regions for containing the doxorubicin.

  2. DXer said

    On Monday, October 8, 2001, Dr. Ivins was at work at 2 PM when he wrote:

    From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Subject: Florida
    Date: Monday, October 08, 2001 2:02:26 PM

    Hi, again,

    I just heard some more news this morning concerning anthrax in Florida. If B. anthracis was found
    in a building or on/in other individuals in a building, is it possible that someone brought into work an
    article of clothing (sweater, vest, suit, socks, etc.) made out of infected sheep wool or alpaca/llama
    hair? This might have special likelihood if someone had bought or received as a gift some imported
    article(s) of clothing. One of the women that works in my lab said she heard on the radio that the
    individual who contracted anthrax had been around sheep recently. If this is true, then this could also
    be a possibility. Finally, what about the possibility that someone inadvertently brought back some B.
    anthracis recently while out of the country?

    We’re quite busy here still with our work both on AVA as well as on a possible new vaccine.
    Have a good fall!

    – Bruce

    He did not enter the B3 that day.

  3. DXer said

  4. DXer said

    microencapsulated water –

    6.  Bubbles in a glass of liquid

  5. DXer said

    When the FBI interviewed scientists with Ames in 2001, why didn’t they collect alibi evidence then? It is a simple matter — it would take just minutes to round up credit card receipts, phone bills etc. Instead, they waited until years later when the documentation would no longer exist.

    (They have not provided a copy of the questions and answers which constitutes a violation of FOIA). Bruce had the largest repository of Ames in the country and it seems a no-brainer.

    Why rely on the unreliable scientific method of polygraphs over contemporaneous documentation of alibi — “Why ask ‘Did you do it?'” but not also “We’re asking everyone where they were.. .do you have receipts etc. that you could share that show your whereabouts on these dates?”

    For example, Dr. Ivins had a group therapy session on September 17, 2001. There is no reason to think he did not attend. But by the time they asked his doctor — after Dr. Ivins’ suicide perhaps — the doctor reported that his computer had crashed.

    Why didn’t the FBI use one of their forensic specialists to retrieve those records? The same records could have been obtained from Dr. Ivins’ health provider.

  6. DXer said

    FBI Agent Threatened To Release Sex Tape With Reporter

    Ryan J. Reilly | January 28, 2011, 3:10PM

    “One FBI employee leaked sensitive information to his reporter girlfriend and improperly stored secret documents in a hotel room which she had access to. Once they broke up, he threatened her with the release of a sex tape they had made together. She reported the threats to a U.S. Attorney’s office. He also reportedly misused his credentials to get into a nightclub and misused a government vehicle. He resigned before he was dismissed.”

    Sex Files: FBI agents guilty of sleeping with sources, watching porn at work and searching files for addresses of ‘hot’ celebrities
    Read more:

    “And one male member of staff shared confidential information with his news reporter girlfriend, and then threatened to release a sex tape the two had made unless she kept it quiet.”

    Where did Rebecca Cooper get a copy of the Hatfill manuscript?

    I had always adjudged it possible that she went to the Madison Building at the Library of Congress and requested a copy from the archives. (You are then permitted to read it there).

    At the time, Hatfill’s “alleged that when the FBI did a search of the apartment, they went into his harddrive, where they seized what I guess was the beginning of a manuscript of a book on counterterrorism, which in turn apparently was shared with an ABC News reporter.”

    [Glasberg revealed today that Hatfill has been working on a novel. Part of the manuscript has been obtained by ABCNEWS affiliate WJLA-TV in Washington. “This novel written by Steven Hatfill envisions a biological attack on Congress,” said Rebecca Cooper, a reporter for WJLA. “It’s an attack so deadly that not only do members of Congress and congressional aides become ill, but hundreds of Washington residents become ill and many die as a result.” ]

    “Note that the FBI leaked the “bio-terror novel” red herring to reporter Rebecca Cooper, at ABC’s Washington affiliate, WJLA. …”

    Read more:

    REBECCA COOPER, CORRESPONDENT, WJLA TV: Well, in fact I think, first of all, we have to be very careful that assuming that a lot of this information is coming from leaks, because it’s absolutely a story. And when his apartment was first searched in June, we gathered much of the information at ABC-7 that we have subsequently reported.

    But my news director, Steve Hammel (ph), my assistant news director, Bill McFarland (ph), were very cautious and had me sit on much of the information we had at the time. And it wasn’t until the second search when there was a search warrant obtained and we had spoken to many, many, many sources, colleagues, friends of Steven Hatfill and were able to gather this information that we went forth.

    KURTZ: And Rebecca Cooper, you obtained a novel that Hatfill was working on. Tell us a little bit about that. And is it – should it be regarded by the press as anything more than an interesting coincidence?

    COOPER: Well, the way that ABC-7 tried to approach this story is we have no idea what evidence the FBI has against him that might possibly link him to the anthrax investigation. We just know that these two very public searches took place. So we wanted to know who is Steven Hatfill. And this novel is an interesting part of his life. It shows just how much he knows about biological warfare. It shows that it’s something he’s deeply interested in.”

    Rebecca never addressed how she got it. Having obtained novels from the Madison building, my experience is there is a considerable delay in requesting things from archives, which are stored offsite, and that it could not have been obtained from there in the time before she reported it. Of course, someone else might have had a copy of the manuscript.

    Additional source:

    Biological Attack Novel

    Glasberg revealed today that Hatfill has been working on a novel. Part of the manuscript has been obtained by ABCNEWS affiliate WJLA-TV in Washington.

    “This novel written by Steven Hatfill envisions a biological attack on Congress,” said Rebecca Cooper, a reporter for WJLA. “It’s an attack so deadly that not only do members of Congress and congressional aides become ill, but hundreds of Washington residents become ill and many die as a result.”

    Glasberg said the novel was stored on a computer seized during one of the searches, and alleged investigators may have leaked it to the media. However, it was unclear how WJLA obtained the manuscript portion.

    Late today, the FBI responded to Hatfill’s and Glasberg’s remarks, saying, “Credible allegations concerning mishandling of evidence will be investigated thoroughly.”

    Was it ever determined that an FBI Agent gave it to Rebecca?

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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: