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

* maybe not so fast … Jeff Kaye writes: this latest “expert behavioral analysis” isn’t going to convince anyone, as it is stacked with government-linked authorities, many of them to DoJ, DHS, or the Pentagon

Posted by DXer on March 24, 2011

******

Jeff Kaye writes (3/23/11) …

  • The investigation by the “Amerithrax Expert Behavioral Analysis Panel” on “the mental health issues” of accused anthrax mailer Dr. Bruce Ivins purports to have been undertaken with “no predispositions regarding Dr. Ivin’s guilt or innocence.”
  • Yet the report says the Panel’s review of sealed psychiatric records “does support the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) determination that he was responsible.
  • In a separate article by Marcy Wheeler earlier today, she points out that the report totally accepts the allegation that the anthrax spores originated from flask RMR-1029, and that therefore Ivins had “the motivation and the means” to carry out the attack.
  • Of course, as Wheeler notes, the National Academy of Sciences recently said that there is insufficient scientific evidence to back up DOJ’s conclusion regarding this. Wheeler’s article also points out other inconsistencies and illogical aspects of the Panel’s report.
  • a brief review of the panel’s bona fides reveals is an overwhelming stacking of this “expert” panel by doctors and others who are deeply beholden to government interests, and in particular to security agencies, including those involved in bioterrorism security.
  • For such individuals, it is difficult to see that they would buck the position of the FBI and DOJ that Ivins was guilty.
  • probably most apposite for the point of this article is Dr. Saathoff’s links to the FBI.
  • In 1996 he was appointed to a Commission charged with developing a methodology to enable the FBI to better access non-governmental expertise during times of crisis.
  • In that regard, Dr. Saathoff has since 1996 served as the Conflict Resolution Specialist to the FBI’s Critical Incident Response Group. In this role, he consults with the Crisis Negotiation Unit and the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime.

it’s hard to believe that any group thus constituted

could have or would have challenged the conclusions of the DOJ.

  • Reading the Executive Summary, it’s apparent how their case is built on a flimsy and prejudiced analysis, as they consistently refer to “circumstantial” evidence, as they construct a dire portrait of a man who is portrayed as “clever,” who “cultivated” a benign presence, while masking his “criminal thoughts.”
  • perhaps the government would want to have this report examined by peer-review.
  • It wouldn’t be so hard to find individuals not linked to the government, but capable of the requisite security clearances.
  • But then, the government hasn’t taken the anthrax terrorism really seriously, leading many to conclude, rightly or wrongly, they have something to cover up.
  • In any case, this latest “expert behavioral analysis” isn’t going to convince anyone, as it is stacked with government-linked authorities, many of them to DoJ, DHS, or the Pentagon.

read the entire article at … http://my.firedoglake.com/valtin/2011/03/23/78203/

One Response to “* maybe not so fast … Jeff Kaye writes: this latest “expert behavioral analysis” isn’t going to convince anyone, as it is stacked with government-linked authorities, many of them to DoJ, DHS, or the Pentagon”

  1. DXer said

    David Willman in Mirage Man explains:

    “Montooth invited a psychiatrist, Dr. Gregory Saathoof, to the meetings for advice on how Ivins might react to certain questioning.” (p. 279)

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: