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

Archive for April 30th, 2011

* Excerpt from Plaintiff’s filing in Amerithrax civil suit explaining why Dr. Ivins is not perpetrator: Dr. Byrne’s deposition

Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 30, 2011

******

******

******

******

Advertisements

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 64 Comments »

* Excerpt from Plaintiff’s filing in Amerithrax civil suit explaining why Dr. Ivins is not perpetrator: Dr. Andrews deposition

Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 30, 2011

******

******

******

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 6 Comments »

* Doubt of anthrax suspect’s role resurfaces in a lawsuit by the widow of anthrax victim Robert Stevens of Florida

Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 30, 2011

******

has the FBI told the whole truth about their case against Dr. Ivins?

 ******

Jane Musgrave writes in the Palm Beach Post (4/30/11) …

  • Add Maureen Stevens to the list of people who don’t believe troubled federal biodefense researcher Bruce Ivins killed her husband and four others in the 2001 anthrax attacks.
  • In court papers filed this month, attorneys representing Bob Stevens’ widow said they had gathered evidence that disputes FBI claims Ivins sent five anthrax-laced letters to politicians and media outlets
  • Maureen Stevens’ attorneys originally agreed to accept the findings of the estimated $100 million FBI investigation.
  • But when Ivins’ bosses at the military lab in Maryland insisted under oath that he lacked the time, equipment and know-how to produce the anthrax, the attorneys said they could no longer accept the findings.

problems with the government’s case against Dr. Ivins …

    • It would have been impossible for Ivins to use lab equipment without being detected
    • he would have left evidence … anthrax dust would have covered the machine he (was alleged) to use to produce the powder.
    • Dr. Ivins did not have the lab skills to make the fine powdered anthrax used in the letters.
    • Ivins never showed “that he understood weaponization technology of anthrax spores”
    • the FBI grossly underestimated the time it would take to produce the amount of anthrax used in the letter attacks.
    • Ivins would have needed six months to a year, working almost full-time
    • someone would have had to help him.

read the entire article at … http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/doubt-of-anthrax-suspects-role-resurfaces-in-lawsuit-1444809.html

******

LMW COMMENT …

In other words, there is no case against Dr. ivins. The Stevens’ law suit against the U.S. government is an opportunity to demonstrate that in a court of law, something the FBI conveniently by-passed by charging a dead man who could not defend himself.

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
******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 12 Comments »

* Laurie Mylroie in a 2001 book described a “Waly Samar” who was a microbiologist connected to the WTC 1993 participants based on phone records. Was he the subtilis expert allegedly connected to Al Qaeda’s anthrax program that the FBI reports it was able to confidently exclude (in adjudging Dr. Ivins the sole culprit)? Did “Waly Samar” live in Trenton in 2001? Who does “Waly Samar” think is responsible for the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 30, 2011

******

******

******

******

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 32 Comments »