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

* DXer on David Willman’s “The Mirage Man”

Posted by DXer on June 6, 2011



the priority now  is to turn to the documentary evidence

 … we invite Mr. Willman to re-think some of his conclusions

based on dramatic information which was

not available to him when he wrote “The Mirage Man.”


  • Last week (May 2011) the USAMRIID for the first time produced the Fellows/Ivins notebook that showed that contrary to the government’s claims, Dr. Ivins had reason to be in the lab each of the nights that the prosecutor Rachel Lieber and the investigators, without basis, speculated he was making a dried powder.  
  • The lab notebook pages that show how Dr. Ivins spent his time on those nights — pages that were withheld by DOJ under FOIA  — were in a notebook maintained by Patricia Fellows.
  • Mr. Willman should also consider that the documentary evidence does not support the government’s contention that the April 2002 submission was made by Dr. Ivins.  
  • The initials on the April 2002 submission are not Bruce Ivins — they are “PF” (which seems to indicate that  his lab technician,  Patricia Fellows, submitted the samples).


detailed comments on many relevant items follow …


Kirkus’ Review summarize: “Much of the narrative reads like a brief for the prosecution, but in the process of trying to get to the bottom of the anthrax attacks, Willman makes clear that many involved in the investigation acted incompetently, maliciously or irresponsibly, including cocksure but ignorant members of the national media and FBI officials, who seem to have settled on the guilt of another obscure scientist, thus doing harm to the investigation by limiting its purview.”
Isn’t an Ivins Theory merely Hatfill Theory Redux?   The “Hatfill Theory” was part of the same unstoppable train wreck as the “Ivins Theory.” There was a change of cars (investigators), but it was the same flawed train of reasoning and the investigators never overcame the earlier truncated emphasis of the investigation.


Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 10, 2011

Anthrax Redux: Did the Feds Nab the Wrong Guy?  March 24, 2011

Isn’t it too much at stake to be content with the latest investigators’ position that they do not know the what, how or why of the anthrax mailings?


David Willman relies extensively upon Dr. Ivins’ first therapist, Judith M. McLean, who writes of how she acquired her psychic abilities in her book available for sale on — from a being from another planet …

In addition to helping the FBI with Amerithrax, the psychic relied upon by David Willman helped with 911 by her astral travelling and retrieval of etheric body parts at Ground Zero … She reports she was granted her psychic abilities by a being claiming to be an extraterrestrial …

To request an autographed copy of the book and urge that Mr. Willman use his experience as an investigative journalist to investigate the issues he has not yet addressed, you can go to hear him speak.

Who knows?  After further investigation, and studying the newly produced document about what Dr. Ivins was really doing on the nights that the DOJ speculated, without basis, that he was making a dried powdered anthrax, he might change his mind.

Some issues and documents that Mr. Willman hopefully will someday address are below.   The country will benefit from his insights on the issues given the wide reading he has done on the subject of Amerithrax generally and access to the investigators  and prosecutors accusing Dr. Ivins.

Have Mr. Willman and the investigators serving as his sources learned from history regarding the Hatfill Theory — or merely recounted it?

The FBI’s key genetics experts debunk the FBI’s argument that the genetics points to Ivins in particular.

Claire Fraser-Liggett: the genetic analysis of the spores in Ivins’ flask do not indicate Ivins is guilty

Disturbing questions haunt the anthrax killings inquiry

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the documentary evidence of Agent Lambert’s concern … that the compartmentalization of the investigative squads ordered by Director Mueller would prevent investigators from connecting the dots.

Dr. Greg Saathoff, whose report Mr. Willman relies on heavily, is a longtime partner of FBI Quantico and instead spins his report as independent.

Posted by Lew Weinstein on March 23, 2011

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the documentary evidence produced in May 2011 that now shows what Dr. Ivins was doing in the B3 and instead bought into the FBI’s mistaken narrative that Ivins had no reason to be in the B3 on those nights.

Instead, Mr. Willman reiterates the FBI’s false claim that the time in the B3 was unexplained.  This, without anything more, demolishes the FBI’s and Mr. Willman’s “Ivins Theory” … on the facts rather the bullshit theory he was “creepy.”
How could the longtime FBI Quantico psychiatrists or the author not have requested from the FBI the record showing what Dr. Ivins was actually doing on the nights that the investigators, without basis, speculated he was making a  powdered anthrax?
David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere notes or even mentions that anthrax in the New York Post letter was 10% silica or silicates. Mr. Willman thoughtfully addresses the general question of the Silicon Signature as part of an Appendix that is important not to overlook.  It appears after the Epilogue.
The Technical Review Panel Summary notes that the NY Post sample had apparently been treated with hydrophilic silica.  The term “weaponization” is used as a straw man to avoid the potential key probativeness of the silicon signature.
David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere explains how Dr. Ivins’ processing could have resulted in the Silicon Signature.
To credit that the silicon signature did not relate to “weaponization” – as many of us do — does not avoid the fact that it is potentially highly probative, and without more tends to be exculpatory of Dr. Ivins.  For example, if it relates to “microencapsulation” using hydrophilic silica, that might be a huge lead.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere notes that experts Weber and Velsko, key experts on the nonmicrobiological signature signature, think that further study is warranted to determine the source of the Silicon Signature.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere mentions the 302 interview statement that checking the health of the animals typically would take 2 hours and was a one person job.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the sworn deposition testimony in the Stevens v. United States case casting doubt on the FBI’s Ivins Theory.  Does he even quote the former chiefs of bacteriology who all agree — to a man — that he has been wrongfully accused?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why  US Attorney Taylor in explaining Ivins’ overtime in Fall 2001, including November and December,  did not realize that  the 2-person rule that in 2002 precluded such overtime.  In his FOIA to the Army, he did not seek access records from the earlier or later period.

Source: “An eye on safety” by Alison Walker …
“Better enforcement … In 2002, USAMRIID officials mandated a two-person rule, which creates peer pressure to follow safety protocol by requiring material be handled by two people of equal experience, training and qualification. USAMRIID is phasing out the rule due to space and staff limitations, replacing the physical presence of another person with video surveillance.”

As an example, he nowhere addresses that Dr. Ivins had no access to the filters and thus there would have been traces in the filters if the anthrax had been made in that B3.

David Willman in Mirage Man interviewed Dr. Ivins’ brother Charles,  who told me about the two undercover FBI agents who had befriended him and Bruce on the cruise.  Here is an email Dr. Ivins wrote to one of the agents.

According to this email, Dr. Ivins was not in fact taking the sleeping aid ambien in Fall 2001.

David Willman in Mirage Man no where addresses the weaponized anthrax that Dr. Ivins says he had heard had been shipped to Ft. Detrick and then went missing.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses that  USAMRIID’s John Ezzell, the FBI’s anthrax expert, prior to 9/11, made a dried aerosol using Ames supplied by Bruce Ivins and sent to Johns-Hopkins Applied Physics.  He never addresses whether those spores show a silicon signature.“murder-weapon”-to-borrow-us/

Where does Mr. Willman address Ivins’ email  of 6-28-05 that discusses powder deemed closest to attack anthrax … in which Ivins says,  “but I told ??? we didn’t make spore powder”

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the email in which Dr. Ivins discusses missing Ames anthrax.

Was it the FBI’s anthrax expert who made a dried aerosol out of Flask 1029 who told Dr. Ivins not to get his “panties in a bind over this”?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that the FBI removed the original of Lab Notebook 4010 (and other notebooks that were subpoenaed) without leaving a copy.  Why won’t the FBI produce the relevant pages from the lab notebooks it took?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere explains that Daniel Seikaly pled the Fifth Amendment in connection with the leaks relating to Hatfill or notes that his daughter represented “anthrax weapons suspect” Ali Timimi pro bono.
David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why the US Attorney and AP created 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.  This misstatement by the US Attorney (picked up by AP) was as great as any misstep in connection with a “Hatfill Theory”.
David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why  the FBI failed to disclose that the photocopier mentioned in the Amerithrax Summary could be excluded as the source of the Amerithrax letters.  That is the sort of evidence that makes for a strong scientific case — or demolishes one.  He instead relies on the much less significant issue of “tracks” and the investigators relied upon apparently do not realize that copies made in September and October 2001 could have been compared, even if the machines were not checked until February 2002.
David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why 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.
David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the identity of the colleague with whom Dr. Heine says he did research regarding antifoam in creating aerosols or Dr. Heine’s report that the FBI falsely told Dr. Ivins that Dr. Heine had accused him of the anthrax mailings.  This is a huge issue because the investigators then used Dr. Ivins’ rage as proof of his guilt — rather than evidence of his innocence.


David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why the FBI never disclosed the email withheld for 2 years that shows Dr. Ivins knew that 5 ml of virulent Ames had been taken from Building 1412.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the email asking about weaponized anthrax that came to Detrick and then was shipped out and some was missing.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere, given that the FBI estimates that up to 377 had access required elimination (allowing for some duplication who had access in both 1425 and 1412), why US Taylor falsely claimed that only 100 needed to be eliminated — only those with access at Building 1425.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the reason the location of the flasks (initially there were two flasks) was carefully whited out so as to change its location from Building 1412 to Building 1425.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses to whom Dr. Ivins was writing about the Ames missing from building 1412 and the autoclaving of samples there.\

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses what happened to the other slant sent from Texas, or interviews the original researcher who obtained the slants from Texas who then went to work for the CIA.

David Willman nowhere addresses Dr. Ivins’ concern expressed to a superior that he was missing samples — only to be told to shut up.  He never identifies the superior telling Ivins that everything was under control.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses when Southern Research Institute first obtained virulent Ames and from whom.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses where the research on the corona plasma discharge and sonicator on Ames spores supplied by Bruce Ivins was conducted for DARPA.   He nowhere addresses where else the DARPA aerosol studies using dried powder were done.   Given the performance of the dried aerosol, the technical question of whether the floatability is due to use of a CPD or sonicator should be addressed by the scientific experts.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that the only expert interviewed by the FBI about the code in the letters for which documents were produced disagreed with the FBI’s theory of code in the letters and that all the letters needed for the FBI’s interpretation of the code were NOT in fact double-lined.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why the FBI was asking everyone whether they had seen olive oil in one of the aerosol rooms.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses whether  olive oil was what the bloodhounds smelled at Denny’s when the FBI assumed they were tracking Steve Hatfill who had visited the day before.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the 16 pages which were not obtained by the FBI until February 2005.’-rmr-1029-anthrax-more-questions-for-um-and-lsu-researchers/

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the work that Yazid Sufaat and his lab assistant did at Omar Hospital in May 2001 while the equipment was en route to the lab being established at Kandahar.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the anthrax made by Dr. Ivins that is missing but instead adopts the prosecutor’s claim he had made it in September and October 2001 (when the evidence now shows he was having to address numerous dead animals that had died on those days).

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses that FBI experts found that Dr. Ivins handwriting does not match the handwriting in the anthrax letters.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses a “Waly Samar” who was a microbiologist connected to the WTC 1993 participants based on phone records and reportedly lived in the Trenton area in 2001 — an estimated 3 miles from the mailbox.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the claim that a pharmacist Najmut Tariq in New York City was connected to Al Qaeda anthrax program and apparently no effort was made to contact him in Pakistan.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses how the FBI was able to exclude Abderraouf Yousef Jdey as the mailer if the FBI doesn’t know where he was and, according to former top CIA analyst Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Jdey was released before the mailings.…-who-was-the-real-anthrax-mailer-the-key-people-in-the-anthrax-mailings-were-not-bruce-ivins-or-steven-hatfill-his-predecessor-as-the-fbis-target-instead-they-app/

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the strain of the virulent anthrax used in one or more of the Al Qaeda labs, for which Sufaat and his assistants were vaccinated.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses experiments led by Egyptian Abu Khabab killing rabbits with poisons under during the month before 9/11 at a camp outside Kabul.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the training in late 2001 at the training camp outside Kandahar to introduce poison into water systems.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the capture of Mustafa Hawsawi and his laptop containing anthrax spray drying documents.

In an appendix after the Epilogue, David Willman in Mirage Man addresses the potentially critical importance of b. subtilis contaminant found in the Brokaw and New York Post anthrax letters … not connected to Dr. Ivins … and substantially ignored by the FBI.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that Anwar Aulaqi was coordinating with Ali Al-Timimi who shared a suite with the two leading Ames researchers.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the documents from peer reviewed literature in Ayman Zawahiri’s possession.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the spraydrying documents on Al-Hawsawi’s laptop.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses Rauf Ahmad’s notes and handwritten letter (he was one of the scientists working for Ayman Zawahiri).

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the typed correspondence from a later visit by Rauf Ahmad indicating that he had successfully achieved the targets.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses Ali Mohammed, the head of intelligence for Egyptian Islamic Jihad who had a document on his computer seized by the FBI that outlined principles of cell security that would be followed, trained Dahab, a Cairo medical drop-out, to make deadly letters.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the Egyptian visitor in the B3 who was the lifelong friend of a former Egyptian Islamic Jihad member, a schoolmate, recruited by Ayman Zawahiri.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that Dr. Bruce Ivins hosted one Egyptian visitor in the B3 who was the lifelong friend of a former Egyptian Islamic Jihad member, a schoolmate, recruited by Ayman Zawahiri and that the FBI not obtain the relevant documents until February 2005.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that this document seized in Afghanistan pointed to infiltration of US biodefense.  To what was the author referring?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses this Zawahiri correspondence with infiltrating scientist that was part of parallel compartmentalized cell operation.  Who else did Ayman attempt to recruit (besides the schoolmate and close friend of Bruce Ivins’ co-worker)?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the documents dating from April 1999 showing that Ayman Zawahiri’s plan was to recruit a specialist.  Who else did Ayman Zawahiri succeed in recruiting?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that the lifelong friends of Dr. Tarek Hamouda, supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins, actively denounce their former medical school associate Ayman Zawahiri as a fanatic – one serving as President of CAIR-St. Louis and the other as author of INSIDE JIHAD. After the FBI first obtained in 2005 the documents relating to Dr. Hamouda’s work with Dr. Ivins, did they contact Dr. Hamid who reports he was recruited into the Egyptian Islamic Group by Ayman Zawahiri while in medical school? Did they contact his brother who publicly announced that he could not identify a sleeper cell if he did not know about it?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses why the FBI failed to disclose that Jdey was detained and released as the same time as Moussaoui.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that Ayman Zawahiri had an extensive recruiting network for his anthrax planning and the announcement of his plans in March 1999, including the blind sheik’s son who spoke alongside Ali Al-Timimi and was on Al Qaeda’s 3-member WMD society.  Did the blind sheik’s son recruit Ali Al-Timimi?

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that  Ayman Zawahiri used “school” to refer to the Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the documentary evidence showing that Ayman Zawahiri used “school” as code and not Bruce Ivins.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that while the US government focuses on Anwar Al-Aulaqi, the media continues  to overlook Aulaqi’s connection to fellow Falls Church imam, a scientist sharing the suite with the leading bioweapons Ames anthrax researchers with whom defense counsel says Aulaqi was coordinating.

David Willman in Mirage Man nowhere addresses the fact that Ali Al-Timimi had unfettered access to the largest microbiological repository in the world where the bacteriology collection scientist was the future head of the Amerithrax science investigation who would guide the NAS review and the production of documents from the FBI to NAS. …

Given the questions not addressed, isn’t there a very real chance that an Ivins Theory is just a Hatfill Theory redux — and had the same effect of narrowing the investigative focus?  I mean, did Agent Lawrence Alexander – with 6 years on the safe streets task force — who was an important architect of an Ivins Theory — have any counterintelligence or intelligence analysis background whatsoever?


80 Responses to “* DXer on David Willman’s “The Mirage Man””

  1. DXer said

    David Willman’s key witness (see his Los Angeles Times article and his book) writes:

    — “The year following the September 11th terrorist attacks, I did bilocation work in both New York City and Afghanistan. As I traveled in astral form at night and back into my body in the morning, I found there were occasions where I was followed by Taliban entities. I became aware that many of the terrorists who died in Afghanistan during our war with them were the entities who followed me. They had continued their terrorist activities in the astral plane … I had to be very careful about self-protection and working with other beings of light. When I left my body at night, I went through a portal of energy that I had created. The portal of energy was a spiral vortex formed as an entrance into the astral plane. This had to be closed down after my discovery of the entities. A new portal of energy was constructed through which these entities could not follow. After a month or more of doing bilocation work in Afghanistan and at the World Trade Center site, I found myself physically exhausted. My allergies worsened, and I was aware I was bringing back toxins from the World Trade Center debris and its surrounding air into my physical body. … One form of self-protection I often use is to take the whilte leight energy and build a geode type crystal energy shield around myself that seems impenetrable.”

    — “In 1996, my mother called and informed that my cousin’s fiance was missing. The wedding was a week away and the bride, John, had disappeared. At that time, the police had insubstantial information or leads to find her. My cousin was frantic. That night in meditation, I received instructions that I should go to Joan. Using remote viewing (viewing long distance events through clairvoyance), I saw Joan in a forested area near or in a state park. I saw her lifeless body in a ravine. I bilocated my astral body to this area and tried to rouse her spirit. It seemed Joan had been drugged, causing her spirit to be confused, very groggy, and unaware of what had happened to her. I helped her remove myself from her physical body. Then, in a slow process, we moved together until I saw a vortex of light open from another dimension. Joan was afraid to move on and wanted to immediately incarnate again. It took some time to help her move through the dimensional vortex to the spirit helpers in the other realm. Throughout the next couple of days, I moved into that other dimensional awareness to make sure she was recovering. Her determination to reincarnate immediately was strong for quite a period of time. Later, she settled into an understanding of all that had happened with her death and was not so anxious to come back down to the earth plane. A few days after this occurrence, I called the police in Oregon and gave them a description of the area in which I had seen Joan’s body. Fortunately, they accepted psychic impressions. I described the type of area I had seen. They informed that she just had been found. She had been located in a forested area in a ravine, as I had described to them. Police discovered Joan had been murdered. My cousin was open to hearing this psychic information, and my experience greatly comforted him. Nevertheless, he grieved continuously for several years until Joan appeared to me and asked me to tell my cousin to let her go and move on with his life.”

    — “As a clairvoyant, I can see these entities hanging around bars and am disgusted to see them affixing to drinking people like parasites. Parasitic entities attach themselves to the aura of the drinker and vicariously experience the sensation of drinking once more. Since alcohol, tobacco, and drugs cause ethic holes in the aura, the entity easily attaches or enmeshes itself with the energy body of the human and gratifies their lust for the substance. Heavy drinkers or drug users often come into treatment with attached entities that use them for their own etheric gratification.”

    — “As a healer and psychotherapist, I treated sexually abused persons who came into therapy brining abusive entities. It is a delicate matter bringing this up to a client. Sometimes the work of releasing this sexual predator must take place after session, which I am in meditation. The client’s belief system may not be able to handle an assertion that they may have an entity attached to them.”

    — “[I]t was evident to me that an entity had attached itself at that time. Subsequently the child’s, and later adult’s, personality changed and that of the abusive spirt came forth. I exorcised this entity from my client, but found the entity then attached itself to me with a murderous intent. It took a little help from my spirit team to get this predator away from us and into a dimension where he could do no mischief.”

    — “If they are negative spirits haunting or hurting others, I sometimes call in a team of spirit helpers, or “ghost busters,” to move the entities along. Spirit releasing and exorcism should not be feared, but you do need to know what you are doing or obtaining help with this task.”

    — “An entity may be witnessed going around a house and living as though they are still alive. This is the type of experience I witnessed in Cape May, New Jersey. While staying at a bed and breakfast, I realized there were three old women entities living in this 1790 house. These women were quite active in their daily routine, having tea and visiting the neighbors. One woman was aware of me and told me she stayed earth bound with her sisters since they refused to move on. We discussed her responsibility to herself, and she decided to move through to another dimension. Her sisters remained in the house. The following evening, I found our room full of hundreds of spirits from the church where these women had belonged.”

    — “”Some individuals have a visitation, or several visitations, from extraterrestrials or ancient illuminated beings that help cleanse away cellular memories and implanted devices. Implants are specific coding devices often used by extraterrestrials to communicate with the person or obtain information from the brain of the person.”

    Yes, this is David Willman’s key source.
    It is perfectly understandable that DW missed this background — but what could possibly excuse his failure not to withdraw his narrative at least as to this issue?

    • DXer said

    • DXer said

      According to the FBI’s Agent Borsuk, Dr. Ivins’ first counsel JM told him that she had been counseling for 25 years. Yet, in fact, she was first licensed in 1999. And she had left Frederick within a year or two of her 4 sessions with Dr. Ivins. Her earlier work as a medium, exorcist, remote viewer would not qualify as professional counseling. “Before Borsuk mentioned a name, McLean interrupted: “There’s only one client in my 25 years of counseling who the FBI would ever contact me about. There’s only been one client that I ever felt was that dangerous, that scary and that I had a sense of evil about. That client was Bruce Ivins.” (Mirage Man, p. 313)

      Pretty dramatic stuff. But Judith had not been a counselor for 25 years. Licensed in 1999, she immediately got sick and exhausted from her astral recovery work in Afghanistan and at Ground Zero, where she got sick from the debris. Being pursued by the Taliban astral entities who had been pursuing her had taken its toll. Sometimes the spirits attached to her clients attached themselves to her — sometimes with murderous intent.

      It is unclear whether FBI Agent Borsuk took 5 seconds to check the date of her licensing at the State of Maryland website.

      • DXer said

        “When Borsuk and postal inspector Armando R. Garcia reinterviewed her in Frederick, Duley described details from the file. Among the revelations was that Ivins had participated in the individual therapy sessions in 2000 with Judith McLean — the mental health counselor to whom he confided his plan to poison Linscott. Based on this information, the Amerithrax task force eventually obtained a judge’s order to review the file and other mental health records…

        McLean’s vivid account of her experience with Ivins gave investigators new insight into his capacity for vengeance. The information also answered a question that had gnawed at Agent Lawrence Alexander, who had spent hours combing through Ivins’s voluminous correspondence: Alexander had never been able to make sense of a statement by Ivins in his e-mail of March 4, 2001, when he wrote that a previous mental health counselor had “wanted to put me in jail.” Now Alexander realized this must have referred to McLean.”

        Comment: Before Amerithrax was closed, why didn’t AUSA Rachel Lieber or Agent Alexander skim the online book presented by such an important issue? It was central to their “Ivins Theory.”

        The DOJ then hired its longtime Quantico consulting psychiatrist Gregory Saathoff to issue a report. He did not disclose that he had closely advised the investigators on how to aggressively approach Dr. Ivins, he then relied extensively on the counselor’s written reports. He issued his report — even held a press conference touting it as an independent report — but did not disclose the online excerpts above.

        Amerithrax is the greatest intelligence failure in the history of United States. These investigators and prosecutors no doubt at the time were acting in good faith and just made some mistakes. To err is human.
        But to not correct the mistake is malfeasance. Dr. Ayman Zawahiri says he will someday attack the United States in an attack that will dwarf 9/11. I would think that the prosecutors and investigators would at least correct the record as to this part of their “Ivins Theory.”

        • DXer said


          December 7, 2010 By Lesley Crossingham

          A Handbook for Healing Through the Dimensions

          By Judith Marie McLean

          Published by Booksurge Publishing
          304 pages, paperback


          Judith Marie McLean does exactly that as she shares her journey, including the many pitfalls she fell into and scrambled out of, with bravery and candour.

          Indeed, it takes a very brave and honest author to recount how she felt the first kundalini energy, or spontaneous awakening, and began speaking “in tongues” to a conservative Mormon congregation. The bishop believed she was experiencing megalomania and urged her husband to seek psychiatric help.

          Many would crumble under that kind of criticism and hostility, instead the once devout Mormon began her own inner journey of healing and spiritual attainment.

          When this occurred to Judith McLean she realised she could have been easily diagnosed as bi-polar or worse. Yet, as she worked to understand this energy, she began to experience a mature sense of spirituality and develop clairaudience, clairvoyance, healing and intuitive skills. She says it took many years of tremendous energy devoted to study, disciplined meditation and guidance before she was able to fully control these skills.

          Judith describes the initial experience being “like having a radio in my head that was running into several stations at once. Which voice did I listen to at what time?”

          This journey also became what she calls the “most ecstatic experience of my life and also the most devastating.” Within a few weeks, both she and her husband left the Mormon Church, were alienated from their families, lost social and religious support and had to deal with what she describes as a “ravaged nervous system” and the subsequent marriage deterioration.

          This earth-shattering experience led her to begin to study hundreds of various religions and philosophies. Her studies included Hatha, Raja and Karmic yoga, where she learned disciplined meditation in an attempt to restrain and control the kundalini energy. She learned several philosophies dealing with past lives, as well as dream analysis and interpretation as she embraced the idea of coming into contact with her own soul and merging the personality with the Soul or Higher Self.


          The author offers her experiences through the dimensions. She claims to have soul memories of other lives ….
          There is also an interesting description of the author’s experience with what she calls “psychic attack.”

          She also contends that as memories and emotions are released, the DNA changes and a “light-body” is developed allowing ascension to occur. During this period, ailments such as depression, chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia may occur. She offers several tools to assist the process, such as sun-gazing and her personal experience with special flower essence remedies.

          Judith McLean has a master’s degree in pastoral counselling and was affiliated with the Unity Centre of Christianity. She ordained as a minister of Light of Christ Community Church and later completed a doctoral program in Religious Studies and Sacred Traditions at Stratford University in Canada. She currently works in pastoral counselling, and remote viewing of disaster work and earth grid healing.

    • DXer said

      In September-October 2010, David Willman’s key witness wrote an article about “Discerning Information & Experiences” for a magazine called NEW DAWN.

      She writes:

      “My personal experience in the exploration of truth showed me that “truth” is a relative concept.

      Those with mental illness can have true psychic experiences that may be disorienting to those with whom they are interacting. A psychiatrist, for example, may find that the mentally ill person has the ability to perceive personal things about the doctor that the doctor has not shared with the patient. The mentally ill may make predictions that take place.

      Different factors, including stress and chemical imbalances, can catapult a person into the astral or psychic world. Sometimes individuals reporting mystical experiences or sudden spiritual awakenings report feelings of “losing their minds” as they walk a fine edge between sanity and psychosis.

      My own experience as a psychotherapist includes working with mentally unbalanced individuals who psychically tell me things about myself that are surprisingly accurate, yet they act in delusional ways. Understanding the nature of psychosis, delusions, and hallucinations, as well as the nature of mystical experience resulting in a spiritual emergence, lend discrimination to what is happening.”

  2. DXer said

    David Willman does not know what strain anthrax Al Qaeda had in Afghanistan and there is no indication that he ever asked. Successive PCR tests showed the strain to be Ames. Documents relating to that testing were inexplicably withheld from the NAS by the FBI Amerithrax scientists so the correctness of lab results could be judged by NAS. David Willman wrote his book before the NAS documents were released having been spun the sorority / McLean narrative over the previous two years. Now we continue to hear David recount the story in radio interviews without addressing the information that has come out. He is silent on such critical issues as the lab notes first produced by the Army on May 11, 2011 showing what Dr. Ivins was doing in the lab.

    So turning back to the documents rather than the spin of investigators that were so desperate for a pat on the back by Director Mueller, we need to ask questions like: What strain were they using in Afghanistan? Where is Yazid Sufaat now? Does he in fact have a microchip in his butt as had been proposed by one leader?

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    since he (Yazid), Bakr, and al-Hud all had anthrax vaccines. As al-Qaida was leaving Afghanistan,Yazidplanned to reinstitute the anthrax program in …

  3. DXer said

    In his book and newspaper articles, David Willman extensively relies on a therapist from 2000 who thinks she has psychic abilities instead of addressing the newly produced key lab notes.

    In her book, that therapist explains that she acquired her psychic powers in 1980.

    “Spontaneous Awakening

    In the summer of 1980, I met a newly converted Mormon woman who was formerly a charismatic Protestant. As our friendship grew, she encouraged me to seek the gift of speaking in tongues (a gift of the Holy Spirit of prophesying in known or unknown languages or utterances). She gave me a self-help guide on the topic. On August 1, 1980, after putting the children to bed, I finished reading the book and followed the instructions on how to open to speaking in tongues. As I followed the directions, I began to sing rather than speak in another language. My voice started going up and down scales, as I seemed prompted to do. I felt a heightened sense of alertness, and, suddenly, I knew I was singing songs from some ancient temples. As I continued, I began having visions and hearing voices. Once activated, I could not stop this experience. I was catapulted into a different state of consciousness for which I had no understanding or reference points. I woke my husband to explan what was happening and egan to tell him of the visions I was seeing. I was not able to sleep that night with this almost manic experience. The explosion of energy left me with clairvoyance, clairaudience, telepathic skills, and healing abilities.”

  4. DXer said

    David Willman quotes an email where Dr. Ivins reported his arms sometimes felt tingly and he had a metallic taste in his mouth. And everyone will remember his cute short poem. Mr. Willman also quotes Dr. Ivins’ first therapist Judith McLean who reported her recollections. He did not discuss with Ms. McLean about the pitfalls of navigating through the astral world.

    Reverend Judith McLean is the author of Ascension Journey: A Handbook for Healing Through the Dimensions. She is a retired psychotherapist and has spent the last thirty years working on spiritual evolution and healing since her spontaneous kundalini experience in 1980. She specializes in spirit releasement, soul retrieval, the building of etheric grids for earth healing and ascension work. She is a writer, global healer, gardener and quilter and lives and works in Waynesboro, PA.

    A Handbook for Healing Through the Dimensions

    Ascension Journey: A Handbook for Healing Through the Dimensions is a record of a path that I never dreamed I would be following. My life changed dramatically at age thirty with a spontaneous kundalini experience, and I was led into a cosmos of many dimensions. My night hours became times of navigating different realms to perform healing for others in etheric planes. World traveling took me to sites of trauma that needed clearing and realignment. As I have worked on healing myself, clients, the earth, and spirit beings, my energy vibrations have become “quickened,” and I now work with ascension energy, which the book describes. My path is unique due to my own background, upbringing, philosophy, and experiences. As I have learned to evolve spiritually, I hope that I can also help others to learn discernment in their pursuit of spiritual evolution. May the purpose of the search be for service rather than power or curiosity and hopefully, the quest will also be one of balance and harmony. This primer will help teach the reader to use wisdom to differentiate between psychism and intuition, illusion and truth. It delineates different etheric planes and tells of the pitfalls of the astral world. With the intent of teaching and passing on what I have learned, I offer Ascension Journey, A Handbook for Healing Through the Dimensions.

    • DXer said

      In her biography Judith McLean describes refers to her “gifts of claivoyance, clairsentience, psychometry and the art of moving and constructing with energy.”

      Clairsentience (also known as psychometry) is the ability to hold an object or touch someone and sense the energy surrounding that person.

      Such paranormal stuff is bunk.

      But can’t we at least recognize that Dr. Ivin’s petty vendettas, violent fantasies and sexual pecadillos are not evidence of the crime at issue — and focus on the important evidence?

      David Willman relies on her extensively on Judith McLean at 62, 63, 64, 65-66, 68, 293, 312, 313, 353, 375n.

      He nowhere mentions Judith M. McLean’s claimed psychic abilities and yet jumps on Dr. Ivins’ emails about tingling arm and metallic taste in his mouth.

      I’m beginning to really miss bloodhounds Lucy and Tinkerbelle. Their smell — 200 times better than humans — is subject to scientific proof.

      • BugMaster said

        Why would a credentialled professional journalist such as Willman include anything in his writings from a source that is clearly crazier than a ****** ?

        • anonymous said

          It’s certainly interesting that a source upon whom Willman relies heavily in his character assassination of Bruce Ivins appears to be ****** .

          And yet Willman himself in his book launches attacks against anyone who disagrees with the FBI investigation. This is found throughout the book (see especially page 326 and 422).

          I think this McLean lady is going to come back to bite Willman hard – especially since he goes out his way to personally discredit the opinions of others (none of whom to my knowledge claim supernatural powders).

        • DXer said

          Astral Travelling, Astral Projection and Bi-locating is explained here.

          You folks are not considering the practical benefits of such a witness. It certainly cuts down on travel expenses for a witness at trial and is useful in case there is a schedule conflict for the witness.

        • DXer said

          I propose that rather than be distracted we encourage Mr. Willman to use his experience as an investigative journalist to obtain documents from the September and October 2001 period from his many contacts among the investigators and Bureau officials. We all want the same thing — to reconstruct the past based on reliable evidence.

        • DXer said

          For those who want to obtain the Reverend’s information and perspective, she is highly responsive to email and has confirmed to me that she is the person relied upon at 62, 63, 64, 65-66, 68, 293, 312, 313, 353, 375n.

        • DXer said

          She writes:

          “Since paranomral experiences, dreams, visions, and telepathic voices are not empirical information, knowing my background and religious experiences will help in understanding the context of what is written.”


          “My next memories are of being in the women’s meeting and during the testimony time, standing and singing in tongues. I then interpreted to these dumbfounded women what it was I was saying. My charismatic friend also rose and explained to the very perplexed Mormon sisters what was happening. It is one thing a hundred and fifty years ago, and quite another to see a modern woman doing it. Someone ran for the bishop of the ward (church) and another hustled a nurse up to see me.”

        • DXer said

          She writes: “My perplexed bishop… later decided I was experiencing megalomania and urged my husband to seek psychiatric help for me. Fortunately for me, my husband chose a different method of dealing with the occurrence other than traditional mental health.”

          [She elsewhere notes that her husband worked in military personnel.]

        • DXer said

          She writes:

          “Thereafter, I was subjected to intense questioning from all of the male hierarchy and released from all my church callings (jobs).”

          “This altered state of consciousness lasted intensely for several weeks and on a lesser scale for months.”

        • DXer said

          JM explains:

          “Lest anyone feel tempted to duplicate this experience, I can now say that this was both the most ecstatic experience of my life and also the most devastating. Profound changes happened in our lives as a consequence of this speaking in tongues blowout. My husband and I both left the Mormon Church a year later, estranged from the members who had never understood or assimilated the experience. It took years to fully understand what happened to us. We were alienated from our families, lost the social and religious support of our Mormon brothers and sisters, had to deal with my ravaged nervous system and poor health from the occurrence …”

        • DXer said

          Reverend McLean explains:

          “”The initial experience was like having a radio in my head that was tuning into several stations at once. Which voice did I listen to at what time? I can now laugh at the absurdity of my early prophecies to my husband’s family to get out of California immediately before it fell into the sea.”

  5. DXer said

    Today David Willman mistakenly writes in the Washington Post:

    “Some of Ivins’s supervisors argue that he was innocent, and they have been successful in thwarting new restrictions. One of the ideas rejected by the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity was to require that at least two researchers always be present for lab work with anthrax or other lethal pathogens. That would have made it hard for Ivins to put in his string of solitary late nights in the lab before the anthrax mailings. The advisory board also turned aside a requirement for standardized psychological evaluations for lab personnel.”

    This is an important confusion on DW’s part. The 2 person rule was implemented at USAMRIID in early 2002. Thus, when Agent Lawrence Alexander did not see the pattern of hours continuing — that is because the two person rule precluded it. Patricia Worsham, Jeff A, Gerard Andrews, David Franz, Russell Byrne, Roger Hedlund, and numerous others argue he is innocent. The one apparently spinning him as guilty was the one who made a large amount of Ames anthrax that is missing. She was thanked by a former Zawahiri associate for providing technical assistance. DW does not know this because he has not interviewed either of them. Agent Lawrence Alexander did not know this because while he spent 2004 googling sororities, he had not obtained the 16 pages of documents first faxed from Art Friedlander’s fax number in February 2005 (AF apparently had received them from Dr. Ivins).

    I agree with DW on the issue of proliferation of labs and/or the need for vetting of personnel. Dr. Ebright has been making the point convincingly for the past 10 years. But to try to tie the defense of Dr. Ivins by almost all who knew him to this issue is uninformed and a gross misstatement of the facts relating to implementation of the two-person rule at Ft. Detrick. The Washington Post needs to issue a correction in this regard.

    On a minor note, one needs to distinguish between antidepressants and anti-psychotic medicine. One should not be understood to imply the latter when only the former were being taken. See Dr. Nass’ discussion of the medication taken.

    Note also, for example, he was not taking ambien in Fall 2001.

    Has DW read his first psychotherapist’s book in which she describes HER psychic experiences? Or has he read the book by the Maryland person who set up the website that was to serve as a sting called anthraxhunt?

    • DXer said

      As between DW’s vs. David Franz’s view of biosecurity, I favor DW/Ebright view and have long argued about the danger of proliferation of labs. Dr. Ebright is a personal hero of mine because of his persistence on this issue. He is my favorite Eagle Boy Scout.

      Mr. Willman is apparently thinking of the issue raised before the National Research Council after Dr. Ivins suicide. Mr. Willman may be thinking mainly of Dave Franz — who I greatly like and respect — who both thinks Ivins likely is innocent and thought a video presence by the second person was sufficient (rather than physical presence of the second person).

      Coincidentally, he was the VP of Southern Research Institute in Frederick where the DARPA-funded work with virulent Ames was done. SRI subcontracted with GMU where Ali Al-Timimi shared a suite with Alibek and Bailey. Al-Timimi was coordinating with Awlaki. And so as helpful as Dave Franz has been — I don’t think he’s been helpful enough. And he refused to answer, and lost touch with me, when I inquired when SRI first acquired virulent Ames. That impedes me in advancing public understanding of things. The fact that he does not think the threat is continuing is small comfort. I think it is. For example, ask David Willman where Yazid Sufaat is and he won’t be able to tell you.

      But of course DW does not concern himself with such details as what was going on at SRI in Frederick. He never bothered to interview Tom Voss. He never even bothered to ask John Ezzell where else the DARPA-funded aerosol research was done. If it did not come on to Agent Alexander’s screen when he was googling sororities, then it doesn’t fit Mr. Willman’s narrative.

      But DW is right as to DF’s role in encouraging that a video / audio presence with the researcher in the lab was sufficient. It’s just that he seems not to be aware that the 2-person rule in fact was implemented at Ft. Detrick in 2002 and in no way motivates everyone’s defense of Dr. Ivins. Ivins’ supporters are in no way motivated in defense of Dr. Ivins by that issue.

      So on a minor note: A correction needs to issue in the Washington Post because it goes to the heart of US Attorney Taylor’s confusion. The same pattern of hours was prevented in 2002 by the two-person rule.

      • BugMaster said

        He had them!

        Where did they go?

      • DXer said

        Southern Research Institute tightened up in 2004 after it mistakenly live Ames that had not been effectively irradiated to researchers at a children’s hospital. Dr. Ivins’ former colleague Patricia Fellows came to head the B3 there after 9/11. (Some thought hot water could suffice in irradiating Ames anthrax).

        “BSL3 labs also vary in the security measures they employ. For example, the Southern Research Institute (SRI), a not-for-profit contract research organization with a BSL3 lab in Frederick, Md (staffed by about 30 people) and one in Birmingham, Ala (staffed by about 80), employs around-the-clock security guards, cameras in workspaces, a two-person rule, and other measures, according to Debra Sharpe, director of compliance and security at SRI. Those requirements stem from a 2004 snafu in which SRI accidentally shipped live anthrax virus to a lab at Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute in California. “At that time, we did not have much institutional control” over security, said Sharpe. “We temporarily suspended our work and really evaluated what we were doing.”

        Read more: How to fix biosecurity? – The Scientist – Magazine of the Life Sciences

      • DXer said


        An eye on safety
        By Alison Walker
        “Better enforcement
        In 2002, USAMRIID officials mandated a two-person rule, which creates peer pressure to follow safety protocol by requiring material be handled by two people of equal experience, training and qualification.
        USAMRIID is phasing out the rule due to space and staff limitations, replacing the physical presence of another person with video surveillance.”

        • DXer said

          Agent Lawrence Alexander, architect of the Ivins Theory, created a misleading artifact based on hours alone in the lab by not taking into account that the 2-person rule implemented at Detrick in early 2002. This graph that you can see in materials outlining an Ivins Theory was central to the speciousness of the theory. The tip-off should have been the lab notebook pages that were withheld for 3 years after Dr. Ivins suicide and not even hinted at until 2010. The government has just tried to make it seem that he was secretly in the lab on some secret personal project — when in fact he attended to his scheduled duties relating to handling the dead and moribund animals pursuant to the protocols in place. (Another tip-off should have been that the hours continued in November and December 2001, AFTER the mailings).

          In contrast, prior to 2002, you could even walk into where the virulent Ames was stored. Now in walk-in freezers you’ll find a sign that says something like “Mandatory: 2 person rule is in effect for entry into Little Alaska”


          Trapped worker leads USAMRIID to new freezer procedures
          Originally published July 15, 2010

          By Megan Eckstein
          News-Post Staff

          A large sign stating “Mandatory: 2 person rule is in effect for entry into Little Alaska”

      • DXer said

        Consider this: How can any reporter or any investigator have an informed view about whether Dr. Ayman acquired virulent Ames if they don’t even know what lab Rauf Ahmad visited when he reported back to Ayman that he had acquired the targets?

  6. DXer said

    Mr. Willman says, at page 133, that the FBI’s anthrax expert had been making a dried aerosol powder at USAMRIID “for several years during the late 1990s” — at the request of DARPA. Interpreting “several” to mean 3 or 4, does that mean when the DARPA-funded former Zawahiri associate worked alongside Patricia Fellows in the B3 using virulent Ames supplied by Bruce Ivins, the FBI’s anthrax expert was already making a dried aerosol power. Is that correct?

  7. DXer said

    Mr. Lake today writes:

    “Although David Willman himself appears to believe that Ivins wrote the anthrax letters and somehow disguised his handwriting, possibly by writing with the “wrong hand,” there are new facts in his book “The Mirage Man” which virtually pinpoint the 6-year-old child who Ivins talked into writing the letters and addressing the envelopes.

    The child is so clearly identified (if you are looking at facts and not ignoring the facts because they don’t support your beliefs), that I have to wonder: Does the FBI know who the letter writer is? Are they withholding the information because it could ruin the child’s life? Since Bruce Ivins is dead, what point is there in turning an innocent 16 year old into “The boy who wrote the anthrax letters”?

    On the other hand, the child and his parents might be totally unaware that the evidence says that a child wrote the letters. The child may never have seen the anthrax letters on TV. (What sort of 6-year-old child watches The Evening News?) And the parents may have been assuming for 10 years that some Muslim wrote the letters.

    The new facts in Willman’s book explain so much. Yet, there is still a remote possibility that it was some other first grader in Diane Ivins day care center during that time.

    There is just one unanswered question that would make it a near certainty: Did the schoolteacher have a six year old child at the time of the mailings?


    There never was a factual basis for Ed’s theory which he borrowed from an internet poster in December 2001.

    • DXer said

      Ed, seems obsessed with the idea that a First Grader can be made to do what he does not want to do. Dr. Saathoff could have a field day with the combination of Ed’s obsession with sex (see Ed’s 500 posts of fake celebrity nudes under the name FakeDetective) and his fixation on his theory a First Grader can be made to do what he does not want to do (i.e., write the anthrax letters).

  8. DXer said

    Subtilis contamined the first anthrax mailing.

    I’ve claimed that the subtilis expert regularly called Ramzi Yousef, the WTC 1993 bomber, throughout the month leading up to the bombing. His roots are in Jordan. Now he has developed a program that can teach people in Afghanistan microbiology through long-distance learning.

    I’ve suggested he lived in Piscataway (3 miles from the mailbox) in 2001.

    For the Piscataway (3 miles from mailbox) listing on FindPeople than can be purchased for a nominal cost, see

    Now Rachel Lieber and Kenneth Kohl (who was distracted, Mr. Willman says, by the major case) would tell you that Dr. Samarrai can be excluded from involvement by reason of a lack of virulent Ames. See Amerithrax Investigative Summary.

    They report that investigators could exclude:

    “A foreign-born scientist with particular expertise working with a Bacillus anthracis simulant known as Bacillus subtilis, and against whom there were allegations that s/he had connections with several individuals affiliated with the al-Qaeda and Ansar al-Islam terrorist networks.”

    I have no way of knowing whether Rachel and Ken know whether Tarek Hamouda, supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins, is a former Zawahiri associate. After Dr. Hamouda did not respond to my emailed inquiry, it was a simple call for me. I called up “Tawfiq” Hamid, author of INSIDE JIHAD and asked if he knew Tarek. He explained that Tarek would visit from Sudan as a child (where his mother was a professor) and he and “Tawfiq’s” brother (CAIR-St. Louis) would go to the comic store together. They then all were in medical school together when Dr. Ayman recruited Tawfiq. “Tawfiq” withdrew when they wanted him to bury alive a security officer near the mosque. Tawfiq consults with the CIA and told me his brother, CAIR-St. Louis, stopped talking to him because of that cooperation. His brother, CAIR-St. Louis says that he told the FBI that he could not identify a sleeper cell if he does not know about it. “Tawfiq” tells me that he called Tarek before 9/11 to ask about patents (on his brother’s recommendation) and Tarek said it was all in the marketing. In numerous patents, Tarek thanks Patricia Fellows for providing technical assistance and thanks Bruce Ivins for supplying virulent Ames.

    If you think Ken’s distractions were huge, I venture that Rachel’s distractions were even bigger. I submit that they never bothered to interview Tarek’s and Dr. Ayman Zawahiri’s mutual friends and acquaintances to explore this hypothesis that Dr. Ayman had used the cover of charities and universities as cover for infiltrating US biodefense. They seen totally unconcerned that the scientist coordinating Anwar Awlaki shared a suite with the leading Ames DARPA-funded researchers, even though it was DARPA that funded making a dried aerosol by the FBI’s anthrax expert, John Ezzell. (There is no indication the FBI ever disclosed this to NAS; I sent a film of Dr. Ezzell’s filmed QandA in early December 2010).

    And so the prosecutors were never able to test the conclusion of the postal inspector that Dr. Ayman had not been able to access virulent Ames. If David Willman thinks that his testing of an anthrax-Al Qaeda hypothesis was thorough, he is mistaken. He did nothing more than state his conclusion while misrepresenting the key facts relating to whether Dr. Ivins was unexplained. (He still has not addressed either the AQ/anthrax theory or the lab notes showing the reason Dr. Ivins had for being in the lab). The 302s explain that checking animals was a one-person job and would take a couple hours.

    By the way, at the same time Mr. Willman points to Dr. Ivins looking at pornography on the computer he seems not to realize that his longer hours coincided exactly with installing an apple laptop in the B3 with internet connection — and that computer then went missing.

    Amerithrax represents the greatest intelligence analysis failure in the history of the United States.

    • DXer said

      The Walied N. $1.95 report turns up the 34 Kensington Ave. address which is the actual apartment Ramzi Yousef (SuperMax) and Abdul Yassin (fugitive : $2 million reward) lived and the apartment to and from which all the calls were made to the subtilis expert in February 1993. An apartment is not given — that would take the fuller background report.

      The Piscataway address is listed generally but not specified as to time or street address.

  9. DXer said

    David Willman writes in a new AP feature:

    “Americans are owed a rigorous reassessment that distinguishes between emotional conjectures and verifiable facts surrounding the anthrax letters.”

    Turn to his Appendix where he addresses the material facts. It’s David Willman who nowhere addresses the lab notebook pages produced on May 11, 2011 that show that David Willman’s claim that Dr. Ivins’ time in the B3 was unexplained was in fact false. If he had requested the lab notebook pages from USAMRIID, he would know that.

    • DXer said

      “My research for a book about the attacks found that misinformation continues to distort many of the essential details. Based on my review of thousands of pages of documents related to the FBI-led anthrax investigation, including the results of genetic and chemical tests, along with my hundreds of interviews with those most familiar with the evidence, there is no credible indication of foreign involvement in America’s worst-ever brush with biological terrorism.”

      Fact 1: David Willman never interviewed non-citizen Tarek Hamouda, a former Zawahiri associate, who was supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins. (Bruce Ivins did not know he was a non-citizen when he was directed to supply the Ames.)

      Fact 2: David Willman never interviewed the subtilis expert Walied Samarrai who called Ramzi Yousef’s number regularly in the month leading up to WTC 1993.

      Fact: 3: David Willman never interviewed “anthrax weapons suspect” Ali Al-Timimi, who was coordinating with Anwar Aulaqi and who shared a suite with the leading DARPA -funded researchers working with virulent Ames, who had the work with the virulent Ames done at Southern Research Institute. Al-Timimi’s lawyer was the daughter of the chief Amerithrax prosecutor who pled the Fifth Amendment about the leaks involving Ali Al-Timimi.

      Instead of investigative the facts and getting the answers, he is just putting forward Mr. Dellefera’s and Mr. Alexander’s spin. We deserved more given the importance to have resolution of these issues.

      What we have here is an unsupported assertion of the investigators’ conclusion and the same sort of tawdry tales that were the foundation of The Hatfill Theory.

      For starters, David Willman nowhere addresses the notes that show that Dr. Ivins time in the B3 on the nights he was claimed to have made a dried powder were not in fact unexplained.

  10. DXer said

    Lots of good weather all around the country in store!

    The Ithaca Festival is this weekend. Stewart Park is less crowded than the Commons. Dr. Linscott and Dr. Fellows would be absolutely fascinating interviews.

  11. Anonymous said

    Who Is Rehashing the Shrinks-4-Hire Report on Bruce Ivins?
    By: emptywheel Sunday May 29, 2011 5:47 am

    Slightly over a week after McClatchy focused new attention on evidence that Bruce Ivins may not have been able to produce the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks, and just days after Jerrold Nadler called attention to the FBI’s obfuscations about the technical data McClatchy used, the LAT has decided to ignore such technical problems with the FBI’s case and return to claims that Ivins must be the killer because he was mentally unstable.

    Of note, much of the LAT story fleshes out the Shrinks-4-Hire report, complete with names, a detailed description of how Bruce Ivins’ mother tried to abort Ivins by bouncing down the stairs, and descriptions from his psychiatrists.

    Ivins grew up in Lebanon, Ohio, a small town 30 miles northeast of Cincinnati. His parents had planned the arrivals of their first two children, both sons, but by late 1945 the couple had no desire to add to the family. In conversations with a sister-in-law, Mary Ivins described how she tried to abort the unwanted third pregnancy:

    Over and over, she descended a series of steps by bouncing with a thud on her buttocks.

    Bruce Ivins, born April 22, 1946, would eventually hear the story himself.


    A psychiatrist who treated him in the late 1990s, Dr. David Irwin, confided to a therapist that Ivins was the “scariest” patient he had ever known.

    It’s as if someone leaked the LAT an unredacted copy of the report in an effort to drown out increasing focus on the many problems with the case. And it’s as if the LAT simply used that as a template for their story, without consulting the information released since the Shrinks-4-Hire was completed that poses problems for it: not the National Academy of Sciences report and the McClatchy stories raising key technical questions about the case, and not Noah Shachtman’s story raising doubts about the FBI’s claim no one else could have accessed Ivins’ anthrax.

    I guess some people tied to the anthrax case believe if you keep repeating the story, “Bruce Ivins stalked women, so he must have tried to kill Patrick Leahy” enough times, people will continue to believe it.

  12. DXer said

    “Rule 404(b) provides in relevant part HN83that evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith.”

    Mr. Willman should spend less time emphasizing what he perceives as Dr. Ivins’ bad character and more on the new lab pages indicating what he was doing on the specific nights that the DOJ had speculated, without basis, that he was making dried powdered anthrax.

  13. DXer said

    “Hatfill was always a little over the top. He once brandished a photo Bedlington considered “a little bit weird” — an image ofHatfill in a biohazard suit pretending to cook up germs in a saucepan. ”

    Comparison: Ivins was weird. Sent out a Christmas card spelling out Happy Holidays in photoshopped anthrax spores — and Nancy Haigwood immediately knew he was the anthrax mailer.

    “A Johannesburg newspaper reported that Hatfill had carried a gun into South African medical laboratories and boasted to colleagues that he had trained bodyguards for white separatist Eugene Terre’Blanche.”

    Comparison: …..

    The Ivins Theory proponents seem unaware that we’ve heard all this before. Now we can expect them to point to Dr. Ivins having a gun (though not a silencer like Dr. Hatfill).

    What we are looking for is material evidence — here proponents of an Ivins Theory have not even yet addressed the lab notebook pages showing that Dr. Ivins time in the lab was not unexplained as they have argued for two years. Hundreds of additional relevant lab notebook pages are still being withheld — with FBI having removed the only copy of most of the notebooks from USAMRIID.

    Just as the federal district court judge trashed a Hatfill Theory in February 2008, prompting Rachel Lieber to have to jump to a different theory, there is not a scintilla of evidence indicating that Dr. Ivins committed the anthrax mailings.

    Request and upload the relevant documents or shut the f— up.

  14. Anonymous said

    New Willman video:

    Notice how ends with “I think this book givers readers the best opportunity to learn the truth”

    • DXer said

      He’s a stakeholder now. He’s selling books rather than addressing the documentary evidence that was raised — the new lab notes showing Dr. Ivins’ time was not in fact unexplained, the fact that the initials are Pat’s not Bruce’s, that the letters needed for the code in fact were not all double-lined, the time of the 9/17 email to Mara, etc.

    • BugMaster said

      I think the best way for David to help us in regards to “learning the truth” would be to have done what an investigative reporter should have done, as in help explain the issues that the FBI HASN’T explained.

      Not a shred of physical evidence in the “case”. So we are to accept as truth the conclusion that Ivin’s mental state proves he did it?

  15. DXer said

    David Willman in Mirage Man discusses what the index describes as lead investigator Richard Lambert’s “narrow-minded focus in anthrax investigation” at 197, 199, 200, 203-205, 212, 214, 218, 219, 229, and 230. (Hindsight, as they say, is 20/20).

    Yet at the time he relays the criticism of the last group of investigators about Director Mueller for his “leave no stone unturned” approach, his top-down guidance of the administration, and his insistence on casting a wide net.

    There seems to be an incongruity in the criticisms. Special Agent Lambert wouldn’t seem to have an undue myopic focus if under Mason’s leadership they are in fact taking a no stone unturned approach. And does the criticism take into account that the investigation was compartmentalized (after the fiasco of the Hatfill leaks)? We can disagree with the conclusion of investigators but the mere fact that there is now a consensus that they were wrong does not necessarily mean that they did not conduct a fine investigation. Indeed, a growing consensus on the Ivins Theory as being Hatfill Theory redux awaits the investigators using David Willman to give themselves a pat on the back. They instead should not have withheld — and continued to withhold — Dr. Ivins lab notebooks that the FBI removed from USAMRIID. Let’s see if the documentary evidence supports the FBI’s current speculative theory.

    Richard Lambert is Special Agent in charge of the Knoxville, Tennessee office.

    Mr. Willman emphasizes that Mueller, Comey and Lambert all foolishly placed great reliance on the alerting by the bloodhounds (which also, he for the first time reports, alerted to Patricia Fellows). Scott Shane wrote a superb review of bloodhound evidence in December 2002 and so this is a very familiar issue to those of us have followed the case closely. We’ve been urging that the FBI abandon a Hatfill theory since July 2002. It only took 6 years. Let’s hope that if an Ivins Theory last 6 years, Dr. Ayman Zawahiri hasn’t attacked DC and New York City in the meantime.

    • DXer said

      Isn’t ironic that so much of the spin relied upon by Lawrence Alexander is coming from the woman who the bloodhounds identified? And who was thanked by the former Zawahiri associate supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins for supplying technical assistance? Was Special Agent Lawerence Alexander part of a compartmentalized investigation that Special Agent Richard Lambert predicted would prevent him from connecting the dots? Answer: Yes. It was Richard Lambert who was right on this point. See his eloquent explanation in his deposition in the Hatfill matter.

      • DXer said

        I do not see that David Willman ever interviewed Michael Mason who took over the investigation from Van Harp. Nor do I see that he interviewed Van Harp. Mr. Willman may be correct that Van Harp came to be fixated on Hatfill. And although I have no idea, Michael Mason may have shared the views of Mueller, Comey, Lambert and Harp on Dr. Hatfill. But I think reporters should interview Michael Mason, notwithstand the busy and important job he went on to take in the private sector. I’ve sung his praises often enough that I won’t repeat them here. But I always credited that when he said they meant to leave “no stone unturned”, he meant it. And that was a sound approach. The fact that Mr. Willman and Lawrence Alexander can make a strong case that Dr. Ivins was creepy doesn’t change a key fact. There is nothing to show that Director Mueller or Michael Mason’s investigative approach was unsound. Here, Mr. Willman postpones discussion of the merits of the criminal accusations to an Appendix after the Epilogue — and fails to appreciate that key documents are still being withheld. He merely credits Rachel Lieber’s characterizations of lab notebook pages he never sought or obtained. Hell, he doesn’t even know what lab Rauf Ahmad visited! Truth be told, once the documents being withheld are produced, an Ivins Theory is even weaker than an Hatfill Theory.

        No one said that solving such a crime would be easy. (Or that it even was unsolvable.) We can’t put our FBI in the position of being damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. We can only require that they comply with FOIA and not let their CYA considerations cloud or dominate this issue of national security.

        • Anonymous said

          Mason has to be careful – he’s a leading contender and agent’s favorite for the new director. May that may be moot if they keep Mueller fior another 2 years.

        • Anonymous said

          “No one said that solving such a crime would be easy. (Or that it even was solvable.) We can’t put our FBI in the position of being damned if they do, and damned if they don’t.”

          Surely asking them to perform their assigned job functions isn’t too much to ask?

        • DXer said

          Michael Mason doesn’t want the job. His name was discussed in the press but he has made plain that he’s not available.

        • DXer said

          Same with Mr. Comey, who is head of a hedge fund.

          I mean it is quite a challenging and sometimes may seem thankless job.

          The agents , as their comments are reported, expressed upset that he did not even attend closing of the case and never congratulated them.

          Given I think they jumped to an equally unsupported theory, I can’t blame him. It is as if they don’t realize that we saw the same type of narrative in long stories about Dr. Hatfill,

    • DXer said

      Dir. Robert Mueller Overcame the FBI’s Biggest Threat

      Wednesday, 25 May 2011 09:35 AM

      By Ronald Kessler

      For FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, the biggest threat to the bureau was a movement to do away with the FBI’s counterterrorism effort and replace it with a new terror-fighting agency similar to the British MI5.

      Such an agency would have investigative powers but none of the FBI’s law enforcement powers.

      Former National Security Agency director William E. Odom, a retired general, first floated the idea back in 2002. In a later Washington Post op-ed headlined “Why the FBI Can’t Be Reformed,” Odom wrote that the bureau’s shortcomings in fighting the terrorist threat were systemic.

      “No one can turn a law enforcement agency into an effective intelligence agency,” he said. “Police work and intelligence work don’t mix. The skills and organizational incentives for each are antithetical. One might just as well expect baseball’s Washington Nationals to win football’s Super Bowl as believe the FBI can become competent at intelligence work.”

      Read more on Dir. Robert Mueller Overcame the FBI’s Biggest Threat
      Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama’s Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

      • Anonymous said

        I think their performance in the anthrax investigation proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are incapable of intelligence gathering.

        Mythbusters could have done a better job in their investigating the science of the anthrax attacks.

        • Anonymous said


          Beginning in the late winter and spring of 2002, the FBI and Department of
          Justice became increasingly concerned about the widespread perception that they were incapable
          of solving the anthrax attacks. As a consequence, they intentionally and willfully leaked to
          innumerable reporters information about the plaintiff, Dr. Steven Hatfill, and about investigative
          interest in Dr. Hatfill. These leaks – which have certainly numbered in the hundreds since 2002
          and which have continued even into this year – were calculated to create in the public mind the
          impression that the defendants were making progress in solving the anthrax case. Because these
          hundreds of leaks disclosed information that was protected from disclosure under the Privacy
          Act of 1974, they were unlawful as well as unjust.

        • DXer said

          The thought question for the day is: if and when Dr. Ayman mounts an anthrax attack against US cities, how will the discussion go. I expect there will be a Congressional Commission probing whether Amerithrax was botched. FBI will produce under FOIA the unsealed documents from the litigation and provide copies of the lab notebooks withheld. But will the OIG address whether the withholding was wrongful? Will it address whether it was wrongful to make arguments inconsistent with the evidence?

          As an example, examination of the toner EXCLUDES the copiers at USAMRIID. See Bartick’s expert opinion being withheld by the FBI. But Dave Willman, confusing that issue with the issue of “tracks” overlooks it and suggests the copiers at USAMRIID were used. His sources? The investigators themselves. So we have the national security issue addressed by press contacts rather than compliance with FOIA and the rule of law. We have it addressed by the Quantico longtime partner rather than actual evidence relating to the crime (the lab notebook pages were withheld from the psychiatrist-partner also). And we have an argument spun that is contradicted by the documents being withheld.

          Analysis by the OIG of the “code” issue would be as simple as getting the original of the copy of the letter and understanding that one of the letters in fact is not double-lined.

        • DXer said

          And as I’ve said, your approach on silicon signature suffers tremendously given you refuse to request under FOIA the article that Dr. Ivins submitted regarding adding silica to the spore coat. If you don’t take care enough to do thorough research on the question, why should anyone credit your theory?

        • DXer said

          As a practical matter, I’ve suggested that it is always better to have a reporter make a request given their status as a media requestor.

  16. DXer said

    Who Is Rehashing the Shrinks-4-Hire Report on Bruce Ivins?

    By: emptywheel Sunday May 29, 2011 5:47 am

    “Slightly over a week after McClatchy focused new attention on evidence that Bruce Ivins may not have been able to produce the anthrax used in the 2001 attacks, and just days after Jerrold Nadler called attention to the FBI’s obfuscations about the technical data McClatchy used, the LAT has decided to ignore such technical problems with the FBI’s case and return to claims that Ivins must be the killer because he was mentally unstable.”

    It’s as if someone leaked the LAT an unredacted copy of the report in an effort to drown out increasing focus on the many problems with the case. And it’s as if the LAT simply used that as a template for their story, without consulting the information released since the Shrinks-4-Hire was completed that poses problems for it: not the National Academy of Sciences report and the McClatchy stories raising key technical questions about the case, and not Noah Shachtman’s story raising doubts about the FBI’s claim no one else could have accessed Ivins’ anthrax.

    I guess some people tied to the anthrax case believe if you keep repeating the story, “Bruce Ivins stalked women, so he must have tried to kill Patrick Leahy” enough times, people will continue to believe it.


    The priority now is to turn to the documentary evidence available on the disputed issues of the merits.

    It turns out that Gregory Saathoff, author and initiator of the psychiatrist report, was intimately involved in planning how the FBI interrogated Dr. Ivins throughout the Spring of 2008 and had first been consulted with regard to Dr. Ivins. See Mirage Man, at p. 279 (“”Montooth invited a psychiatrist, to the meetings for advice on how Ivins might react to certain questioning.”) They would discuss how best to approach Dr. Ivins for hours. Truth be told, they also had consulted him in 2007 before the November 2007 search. Dr. Saathoff was definitely a stakeholder and not independent. He was an active part of the investigation of Dr. Ivins. He was the FBI’s expert. AUSA Lieber expected or strongly feared Dr. Ivins would commit suicide if released from Pratt in July 2008. Despite their good faith and brilliance, the tragic events that unfolded make both the psychiatrist and the lawyer who planned things invested. At the same time they were testing his DNA to compare against the semen on his panties, the prosecutors and investigators had told him that they were going to call his family before the grand jury to confirm he was unhappy at home. Mr. Willman notes that his daughter had previously attempted suicide.

    I don’t see any evidence that Dr. Ivins was involved in the anthrax mailings (although I see lots of fascinating potential leads in the documentary evidence). ( I see Nancy Haigwood who was furious that her research had been compared to “cold fusion” in September 2001 and she suspected Ivins was to blame; Mr. Willman nowhere mentions this.) All I see is a theory that has strong parallels to a Hatfill Theory accompanied by dramatic withholding of documents and mischaracterization or misunderstanding of the documents. (There were also people who loathed Dr. Hatfill and thought him despicable; Mr. Willman does not mention that Dr. H actually had a forgery of his PhD diploma made).

    Totally apart from Dr. Ivins’ guilt or innocence — something that still needs to be examined — I recognize that he had every reason to be suicidal and driven to rage in July 2008. Where does Dave Willman address Dr. Heine’s claim that the investigators falsely told Dr. Ivins that Dr. Heine had fingered him? Did Dr. Saathoff and AUSA Lieber and Special Agent Lawrence Alexander approve that tactic? Why? Because there was so much pressure to close the case now that in February 2008 the federal district court had blown away their “Hatfill Theory.”? Did Dr. Saathoff approve testing the semen on his panties? They knew the human DNA on the letter was female and belonged to the FBI biology lab person who pled guilty to fraud in 100 cases. That was never the reason for swabbing Dr. Ivins for DNA. The lab report submission, nowehere mentioned by Mr. Willman so far as I see, makes that plain that it was to compare against the semen on the panties.

    Respectfully, Special Agent Lawrence Alexander and his colleagues should ask that the DOJ FOIA office produce the nonsealed documents in the Stevens litigation. These investigators have been speaking to Mr. Willman at length early and often; surely they can drop an email to the FOIA unit. The investigators, if they want their speculative Ivins Theory to be accepted, should stop sending flacks and advocates — no matter how well-spoken and accomplished — our way dressed up to be independent. (The response to a FOIA request shows that Mr. Willman made his FOIA request about Dr. Ivins’ 2002 contamination episode BEFORE his suicide; notice he doesn’t list the dates of interviews of agents).

    For example, Lawrence Alexander and AUSA Rachel Lieber should have DOJ produce the September 17, 2001 email from Bruce Ivins to Mara Linscott dated September 17, 2001. Rachel claimed it had been written from Dr. Ivins work computer. But USAMRC FOIA people emphatically dispute that after careful double-checking. Source: email from their wonderful USAMRC FOIA person and email from Rachel to me refusing to produce the notes. The fellow who agrees with Mr. Willman, the fellow who argues that it is 99% certain that a First Grader wrote the letters at Dr. Ivins’ direction, argues that Dr. Ivins left the house at 11:30 pm and then returned before going to work at 7 a.m. Amanda and Andrew were high school seniors — that’s 3 adults in a small house. Let’s produce all of Dr. Ivins lab notebooks from the period and develop the timeline.

    Where did Dr. Saathoff disclose that””Montooth invited a psychiatrist, to the meetings for advice on how Ivins might react to certain questioning.” See Mirage Man, at p. 279. I see an awful lot of disclosure about whether Dr. Ivins blindfolded Teddy Bears when he was 6 but so far have overlooked any disclosure that the FBI falsely told Dr. Ivins that Dr. Heine had fingered him or that they had told him that they were going to call his vulnerable daughter before the grand jury. (They insisted to Amanda that Dr. Ivins was a murderer). Dr. Ivins fiercely loved his daughter and son and was very protective of Amanda given her previous suicide attempt.

    I see an awful lot of effort to claim that Dr. Ivins made a dried powder on those specific dates — and at the same time AUSA Rachel Lieber refused my written request to produce the lab notebook pages written on those nights. Key lab notebook pages are still being withheld and the GAO needs to probe who is responsible for any continued withholding. The FBI took the only copy from USAMRIID and so USAMRIID cannot produce them. The DOJ investigators and prosecutors should back full production under FOIA of Dr. Ivins lab notebooks for the relevant period — 1998 – 2001, as well as production of a copy of the 9/17/2001 email to Mara Linscott.

  17. DXer said

    David Willman writes:

    “Ivins had plenty of time to make the separate seven- to eight-hour round trips to the mailbox in Princeton.” (p. 349).

    Comment: If the window was from 5 p.m. on 9/17 to 7 a.m. on 9/18… what time was the 9/17 email from Bruce Ivins to Mara Linscott? And if one doesn’t know that, then how does one know he had plenty of time? He would have had to leave after his group therapy session that evening that a recent report by longtime Quantico consultant Dr. Saathoff confirms he attended. Note that both Amanda and Andy were also high school seniors living in the house and all 3 think Dr. Ivins was innocent. Family members, such as Bruce’s brother Charles, had no idea that Dave was going to spin Bruce as guilty. Charles thought his aim was to paint an “empathetic” portrait.

  18. DXer said

    Dr. Ivins card access records in late September 2001 and early October 2001 corroborate his work with animals — “AR” on the Floor For USAMRIID Building Floor Plan Stands For “Animal Resources”

    The problem is that now we have another vested actor. The investigators don’t want to think they drove an innocent man to his suicide. Now this accomplished book author doesn’t want to think he just wrote a book arguing that a guy was guilty because he was psychologically troubled –when there is no solid evidence of his guilt. That’s why the approach that needs to prevail is: produce the documents under FOIA. If Dave would FOIA DOJ for the Stevens documents (those not under seal) — if he hasn’t already — that would be an additional pool of documents to draw learning from. Status as a media requestor would help obtain the documents.

  19. DXer said

    What specific work did Ms. Blake do relating to Amerithrax? That is, if we are to understand that her human DNA got on the envelope, how did it get on the letter? Am I correct in assuming that the technician had no connection to the FBI anthrax expert who made a dried aerosol out of the Ames supplied by Dr. Ivins from Flask 1029? At what location did she work? Did she work for the same unit as the fellow making the dried aerosol for DARPA?


    David Willman writes in Mirage Man (June 7, 2011):

    “As for the single speck of dead skin? It did not belong to Hatfill’s girlfriend or anyone else of interest to the investigation. The skin was traced to a female technician who had accidentally contaminated the evidence soon after its arrival at the FBI lab and had resigned under pressure in June 2002 because of other irregularities, including falsifications of data. She later pleaded guilty to submitting falsified DNA analysis reports in more than one hundred cases; the anthrax case was not among them.” (p. 204) citing n. 31 at p. 402 (“Author’s interviews with present and former officials familiar with the role of the former technician Jacqueline A. Blake in accidentally contaminating the Leahy letter from within the FBI laboratory, 2009 and 2010.”

    May 28, 2011 at 2:22 pm

    Ex-FBI Biologist Admits Falsifying DNA Data
    May 19, 2004|From Times Wire Reports
    A former biologist in the FBI laboratory pleaded guilty to submitting falsified DNA analysis reports in more than 100 cases.

    Jacqueline A. Blake, 40, of Upper Marlboro, Md., pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Washington to a single count of making false statements on official government reports she prepared. Blake faces a maximum penalty of a year in prison and a $100,000 fine at sentencing scheduled for Sept. 20.

    WASHINGTON (AP) – A former biologist in the FBI laboratory pleaded guilty Tuesday to submitting falsified DNA analysis reports in over 100 cases.

    Jacqueline A. Blake, 40, of Upper Marlboro, Md., pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Washington to a single count of making false statements on official government reports she prepared. Blake faces a maximum penalty of a year in prison and a $100,000 fine at sentencing scheduled for Sept. 20.

    Blake admitted that from August 1999 to June 2002 she wrote and submitted more than 100 reports containing false statements about her DNA analysis work. In particular, she falsely certified that she had performed certain control tests designed to ensure the reliability of the DNA analysis.

    • DXer said

      What does Ms. Blake say about her work on Amerithrax? That would be a fascinating interview. Perhaps the way it would work is scrapings are given to the lab tech to analyze and then inadvertently there was a transfer of a speck of her skin.

      More Wrongdoing Found at FBI Crime Lab

      April 15, 2003

      WASHINGTON (AP) – Reformed after controversy in the mid-1990s, the FBI crime lab is dealing with new wrongdoing by employees that has opened the door for challenges of the lab’s science in scores of cases involving DNA and bullet analysis, internal documents show.

      One FBI lab scientist, who connected suspects to bullets through lead analysis, has been indicted after admitting she gave false testimony, and a technician has resigned while under investigation for alleged improper testing of more than 100 DNA samples, according to records and interviews.

      In addition, one of the lab’s retired metallurgists is challenging the bureau’s science on bullet analysis, prompting the FBI to ask the National Academy of Sciences to review its methodology, the records obtained by The Associated Press show.

      FBI Lab Director Dwight Adams said detection of the problems illustrates that reforms are working.

      “The difference is these are being caught and dealt with swiftly. Our quality assurance program is in place to root out these problems, incompetence and inaccurate testimonies,” Adams said in an interview. “These weren’t fortuitous catches; they were on purpose.”

      Defense lawyers are already mounting challenges in high-profile cases handled by the two employees and are questioning the FBI’s project to build a national DNA database that will help law enforcement identify suspects based on their genetic fingerprints.

      “We all have assumed the scientists are telling the truth because they do it with authority and tests. And as a result FBI scientists have gotten away with voodoo science,” said Lawrence Goldman, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

      The Justice Department’s internal watchdog is investigating FBI lab technician Jacqueline Blake for allegedly failing to follow proper scientific procedure when analyzing DNA in at least 103 cases over the past few years, officials said.

      The officials said they have found that the technician failed to compare the DNA evidence with control samples, a required step to ensure the accuracy of tests. Blake resigned from the FBI lab recently.

      Blake’s work has become an issue in a prominent case in New Jersey, where five police officers are challenging blood evidence she analyzed that was used to convict them of federal civil rights violations in the death of a prisoner.

      FBI officials have already taken steps to protect the national DNA registry in light of the allegations against Blake and separate revelations of problems in DNA analysis at the Houston police crime lab.

      In Blake’s case, 29 DNA samples that she placed into the database were removed and are being reanalyzed. The review so far has not found any instances in which her DNA analysis was inaccurate, and those samples have now been re-entered, Adams said.

      In addition, FBI officials recently banned the Houston police lab from entering new DNA samples into the national registry. Judges in the Houston area have requested a grand jury investigation into that lab’s practices.

      The FBI made widespread changes in the mid-1990s after its lab was rocked by a whistleblower’s allegations and an investigation that found shoddy science by several lab examiners. AP reported last month that Justice officials have identified about 3,000 cases that might have been affected by those earlier problems and have let prosecutors decide whether to notify convicted defendants.

      The new problems surfaced in the last year.

      FBI lab scientist Kathleen Lundy, an expert witness in murder trials who performs chemical comparisons of lead bullets, was indicted earlier this year on a charge of misdemeanor false swearing by Kentucky authorities after she acknowledged she knowingly gave false testimony in a 2002 pretrial hearing for a man accused of murdering a University of Kentucky football player.

      Lundy informed her FBI superiors of the false testimony a couple of months after it occurred. By that time she had corrected her pretrial testimony at the trial and had been questioned about it by defense lawyers. Federal authorities decided not to prosecute her, but Kentucky prosecutors brought the misdemeanor charge.

      In memos and a sworn affidavit, Lundy stated she had an opportunity to correct her erroneous testimony at the hearing, but didn’t.

      “I had to admit it was worse than being evasive or not correcting the record. It was simply not telling the truth,” Lundy wrote in a memo to a superior.

      “I cannot explain why I made the original error in my testimony … nor why, knowing that the testimony was false, I failed to correct it at the time,” Lundy wrote in a subsequent sworn affidavit. “I was stressed out by this case and work in general.”

      Lundy also disclosed she was increasingly concerned that a former lab colleague, retired metallurgist William Tobin, was beginning to appear as a defense witness in cases and openly questioning the FBI’s science on gun lead.

      “These challenges affected me a great deal, perhaps more than they should have. I also felt that there was ineffective support from the FBI to meet the challenges,” Lundy wrote.

      Lundy’s written declarations have already been turned over in the Kentucky case and may have to be disclosed elsewhere where lead bullet analysis is being questioned.

      In New York, state prosecutors cited the allegations when they dropped plans to call Lundy as a prosecution witness in a murder retrial. “Her value as a witness would be negated,” New York City Assistant District Attorney James Rodriguez explained to the judge.

      Adams, the lab director, said the FBI remains confident that its lead bullet analysis is based upon “a proper foundation” but nonetheless has asked the National Academy of Sciences to review the lab’s work.

      “We do anticipate some suggestions, ways to improve what we already do and we’ll gladly look at that,” Adams said. “We want correct and unassailable results and objective testimony, and to do that we’ve got to be open to outside scrutiny and outside review.”

      Tobin retired in 1998 as an FBI lab metallurgist after 27 years. He was part of the government team that concluded the TWA Flight 800 explosion over New York was caused by a mechanical problem, not a bomb or missile

      In an interview, Tobin said he remains a staunch supporter of the FBI lab but long suspected while working alongside the bureau’s lead bullet analysts that they were engaged in inaccurate science. After retiring, he said, he conducted research that substantiated his concerns.

      Tobin said he also has gathered evidence that FBI lab experts are stretching their conclusions beyond lab reports when they reach the witness stand.

      “Defense lawyers are being ambushed and jurors are being misled,” he said. “There is no comprehensive or meaningful data whatsoever to support their analytical conclusions.”

      FBI officials dispute Tobin’s assessment, saying there have been nearly a dozen published articles or presentations to scientific peer groups in the past couple of years that validate the FBI’s science on bullets.

    • DXer said

      Who tested the 22 lbs. of flesh of the hijackers on Flight 93?

      In fact, Blake’s work in 2000 and 2001 was anything but satisfactory. Without the Laboratory’s knowledge, from 2000 to 2002 she failed to process the negative controls in 90 out of 92 cases where DNA was detected on the evidence. Blake’s misconduct was not discovered by the FBI until April 8, 2002, more than two years after she began work as a PCR Biologist. She initially denied omitting the negative controls when confronted by Richard Guerrieri, the DNAUI Unit Chief, on April 9, 2002. After that meeting, Blake did not report to the Laboratory again for work.

      On May 10, 2002, Guerrieri notified Blake that she would be on leave without pay as of May 19. On June 7, Guerrieri and Joseph DiZinno, the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI Laboratory (Deputy Director), went to Blake’s residence to present a notification document from FBI OPR stating that her conduct had been referred for investigation. They also told her that the OIG was initiating a review of her actions. Blake said that she had thought about the matter and decided to resign. She turned over her credentials and building entry materials to Guerrieri. Blake composed a handwritten resignation letter, effective that day, which she gave to Guerrieri.

      The FBI notified the OIG of Blake’s misconduct in early May 2002. The OIG began an investigation, and over the next five weeks interviewed Laboratory staff, analyzed documents, and met with representatives of the FBI OGC. On July 11, 2002, an OIG attorney and investigator interviewed Blake at her home. Blake admitted to the OIG that she knew that she was not processing the negative controls that were required by the protocols. She also said she knew she was misrepresenting the status of the negative control samples when she did not properly prepare them for injection but initialed the related injection sheet anyway. On August 23, 2002, Blake executed an affidavit attesting to these facts. The OIG referred the matter to the Department’s Public Integrity Section for a prosecution decision. On May 18, 2004, Blake pled guilty in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to a misdemeanor charge of providing false statements in her laboratory reports.

      In her interview with the OIG, Blake explained that she wanted her cases to run smoothly and not to show contamination. Some Laboratory employees have speculated that the reason that she failed to process the negative controls was because she lacked confidence in her ability to master PCR/STR testing methods, which are far more sensitive to contamination than RFLP procedures.

      • DXer said

        The FBI told the NAS that it believes the positive finding in hijacker for anthrax remains from Flight 93 was due to laboratory contamination.

        Posted by Lew Weinstein on February 15, 2011

        • DXer said

          Finally, in the new materials provided to the committee it is noted that PCR analysis was performed on human remains from United flight 93 on 9/11/2001 that were identified as those of the hijackers (B3D1). Analysis was performed at USAMRIID and at AFIP for sequences diagnostic of B. anthracis. One assay at USAMRIID gave positive results, but these results were believed by the FBI to be due to laboratory contamination.”

          “As the committee learned at the January 2011 meeting, there were no tests done on remains from any of the other September 11, 2001 hijackers.”

          Were the remains tested the fellow who recently arrived from Kandahar where the anthrax lab was?

          What was the scientific basis for concluding the positive test was due to contamination?

          Did Ms. Blake work on identifying the remains? Were those some of the results that needed to be checked due to her failure to do the control test so as to avoid contamination?

        • DXer said

          The Wrongful Conviction as Way of Life

          By JEFFREY ROSEN

          Published: May 26, 2011

          Judge Learned Hand called “the ghost of the innocent man convicted” an “unreal dream.” But in “Convicting the Innocent,” Brandon L. Garrett shows that it can be a “nightmarish reality.” Since the late 1980s, DNA testing has exonerated more than 250 wrongly convicted people, who spent an average of 13 years in prison for crimes they didn’t commit.

        • DXer said

          Am I correct that the prosecutor and investigators have not produced the documents, so far as I can see, relating to the PCR analysis of human remains and the positive test for anthrax. (I have searched the 9600 pages of documents produced to the NAS in searchable format on my computer.) I do not know who performed the PCR analysis on the human remains or what connection Jacqueline A. Blake had with the letter. And the DOJ Office of Inspector General was not informing parties who submitted evidence that the work was tainted.

          If might borrow the argument made by a criminal defense attorney, anyone doubting the importance of Government in the Sunshine and transparency on this issue need only look at recent newspaper headlines during the same period or read the law professor’s recent book described in the New York Times.

          • Jim Yardley, Oklahoma Inquiry Focuses on Scientist Used by Prosecutors, N.Y. TIMES, May 2, 2001, at A1 (discussing Joyce Gilchrist).

          • Adam Liptak, 2 States to Review Lab Work of Expert Who Erred on ID, N.Y. TIMES, Dec. 19, 2002, at A24 (discussing erroneous hair evidence in the trial of Jimmy Ray Bromgard, who spent 15 years in prison before being exonerated by DNA).

          • Jim Dwyer, Some Officials Shaken by New Central Park Jogger Inquiry, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 28, 2002, at B1, B3 (“At the trial, the prosecution had argued that hairs found on Mr. Richardson’s clothes came from the jogger. Recent DNA tests show that claim to be wrong.”).

          • NickMadigan, Houston’s Troubled DNA Crime Lab Faces Growing Scrutiny, N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 9, 2003 (operations suspended in December after an audit found numerous problems).

          • Ralph Blumental, Double Blow, One Fatal, Strikes Police in Houston, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 30, 2003, at A23 (“The Houston police chief announced on Wednesday that he had shut down the Police Department’s toxicology section after its manager failed a competency test ….”).

          • Ex-F.B.I. Biologist Falsified DNA Reports, Associated Press, May 19, 2004 (Jacqueline A. Blake, former DNA biologist for the F.B.I., pleads guilty to making false statements on official government reports).

          • Sara Kershaw, Spain and U.S. at Odds on Mistaken Terror Arrest, N.Y. TIMES, June 5, 35
          2004 at A1 (Spanish clear Portland-area lawyer Brandon Mayfield. Although F.B.I. found fingerprint match, Spanish officials matched the fingerprints to an Algerian national.).
          Paul Giannelli, Admissibility of Lab Reports: The Right Of Confrontation Post-Crawford, 19 Criminal Justice 26 (Fall 2004).

          Frederick Whitehurst, a former Special Agent in charge of the FBI crime lab, documents numerous instances of forensic lab fraud including cases where a crime lab director in Maryland altered parameters in mass spectrometers used to analyze drugs as well as a D.E.A. chemist who acknowledged filing false lab reports in drug cases. Frederick Whitehurst, Forensic Crime Labs: Scrutinizing Results, Audits & Accreditation—Part 1, Champion (April 2004).
          Additionally, the article noted numerous problems documented in a report by the Department of Justice Inspector General at the F.B.I. lab:
          For instance, in 1997 the United States Department of Justice Inspector General’s Office, upon the completion of a lengthy investigation of problems within the FBI crime lab, found the following problems within that lab: scientifically flawed testimony, inaccurate testimony, testimony beyond the examiner’s expertise, improper preparation of laboratory reports, insufficient documentation of test results, scientifically flawed reports, inadequate record management and retention systems, failures by management to resolve serious and credible allegations of incompetence, and a flawed staffing structure of a unit in the crime lab. Id. at 8; see also, U.S. Department Of Justice, Office Of The Inspector General, The FBI Laboratory: An Investigation Into Laboratory Practices And Alleged Misconduct In Explosives- Related And Other Cases, April 1997.
          The Online Forensic Fraud Archive contains more recent cases of fraud, http://www.corpus- Other cases of misconduct or error are also documented in legal journals and case law. See J. Herbie DiFonzo, The Crime of Crime Labs, 34 Hofstra L. Rev. 1 (Fall 2005); Paul C. Giannelli, The Abuse of Scientific Evidence in Criminal Cases: The Need for Independent Crime Laboratories, 4 Va. J. Soc. Pol’y & L. 439 (1997); In re Investigation of W. V. State Police Crime lab, Serology Div., 438 S.E. 2d 501 (W. Va. 1993).

          I’m a big fan of law enforcement because their job is to protect and serve — which is a very honorable pursuit. Moreover, mysteries are very interesting. Just this month I had a mysterious intruder in my house and six police cars responded interrupting all the fun I was having with a baseball bat.
          The perp in my headlights when I first cornered him was very photogenic.

  20. BugMaster said

    At least David got the title spot-on.

  21. DXer said

    David Willman writes:

    “After installing Inspector Richard Lambert and supporting his misguided leadership, Mueller in the end offered no congratulations for a job well done to Ed Montooth, Vince Lisi, Tome Dellafera, Lawrence Alexander, or the others who steered the investigation away from Hatfill to Bruce.” (p. 326).

    Given the documents withheld until last week show that Dr. Ivins time in the lab was not in fact unexplained, Amerithrax should be reopened.

    Robert Mueller: Amerithrax represents the greatest failure in intelligence history but it is all fixable. You have the strength of character to set things right. No one ever said that solving difficult crimes and keeping the country safe was going to be easy.

  22. DXer said

    David Willman at page 310 writes that after the July 9 venting he went to work like usual:

    “Over the previous several months Ivins had vented to Anderson about the federal investigation. Now Ivins again appeared incensed, saying that the investigators had told Amanda that her father was a “murderer.” Citing Amanda’s brush with suicide as a teenager, Ivins told Anderson he was concerned about how vulnerable she was emotionally to what he described as aggressive investigative tactics.”

  23. DXer said

    If we want to focus on irrelevant sexual stuff (such as this book does) — rather than the merits of the lab notebook pages showing the reason he was in the lab — then consider the US Attorney’s Office in Washington.

    The Ice Princess was having an affair with a married man and broke it off. He walked into her office with his member exposed to show her what she was missing. When it was learned he was asking women in the office out in connection with giving them assignments, he was let go. Separately, at the same time, the Ice Princess was reprimanded for going to visit a key salafist-jihadi with whom a deal had been cut.

    So if you see someone from jumping from a horse named “not a scintilla” to “not an iota” maybe there were distractions in the office.

    I propose we instead turn to the merits of the lab notebook pages and the initials relating to the April 2002 submission.

    • DXer said

      Another key point is that not all the letters necessary for the code are in fact double-lined. That was just something Pat made up to stick it to Bruce.

      • DXer said

        Just like the DOJ’s prosecutor refused to produce the lab notes showing what Dr. Ivins was doing, the Department of Justice is refusing to produce the 9/17/2001 from Bruce to Mara so that the time it was sent can be ascertained. The GAO needs to study this question of the withholding of documents.

        • DXer said

          David writes: “One of the computers the FBI had taken from him in November 2007 showed that he had viewed scores of pictures of women who were blindfolded, bound and nude.”

          The Ivins Theory is just Hatfill Redux — bringing back the days in 2002 when we heard lots of detail not material to the whodunnit that is intended to diminish the individual.

        • DXer said

          The book talks about how angry Dr. Ivins was coming into the office on July 9, 2008, snarling, without noting that DOJ had advised him they wanted to take his DNA — they wanted to test the semen on the panties he had found in the garbage. Is there anyone who would have done well under these circumstances?

        • DXer said

          The human DNA from the letters had already been determined to be female and from the FBI lab tech who was convicted in 2004 for submitting falsified evidence in 100 cases.

          The lab submission form says it is for the purpose of testing the semen on the panties.

  24. BugMaster said

    So an individual’s past history of personal vendettas is evidence that he committed crimes against anonymous victims?

    Isn’t vindictive behavior by definition, personel?

    Perhaps Willman will address these and other issues he ignored in his current book in a sequel.

  25. DXer said

    Did David Willman consider that these are not Bruce Ivins’ initials on the log relating to submission of the April 2002 sample? They appear to be “PF” — the initials of Patricia Fellows. (And Dr. Ivins countless times that the samples had been submitted by his lab tech). This is way more important to analysis than the fact that Dr. Ivins went to a Monkees concert in 1967 or whether he used to blindfold his teddy bear.

    The lab notebook pages that show how Dr. Ivins spent his time on those nights — pages that were withheld by DOJ under FOIA — were in a notebook maintained by Patricia Fellows.

    It was Patricia Fellows who was doing the research to make a more lethal Ames by duplicating the virulence plasmids x 101 and x102. She was the aerobiology expert. She was the one thanked by the DARPA-funded former Zawahiri associate Tarek Hamouda for providing technical assistance in connection with their work on virulent Ames supplied by Bruce Ivins. She is the one who wore wire on June 5, 2008 and elicited such dramatic incriminating admissions as “I don’t have no clue how to, how to make a bio-weapon and I don’t want to know.” (Was it at the Mirage Cafe’ & Grill Rstrnt 243 North Market Street, Frederick, MD?)

    The investigators did not even obtain the 16 pages about the research until February 2005, long after Lawrence Alexander had targeted Dr. Ivins as creepy and set his sights on him.

    Amerithrax represents the greatest intelligence failure in the history of the United States.

    David Willman does not offer up one iota of evidence against Dr. Ivins that withhstands comparison with the documentary evidence. The exclusion of up to 377 who had access to Flask 1029 — the genetically identical Ames — just at Ft. Detrick is just assumed as a premise in a passing sentence. He claims lab notebook pages don’t corroborate what Dr. Ivins was doing in the lab — but that’s only because he never bothered to even request them from the Army under FOIA. (AUSA Rachel Lieber refused a request for them).

    Given that the bloodhounds had alerted to Patricia Fellows in 2002 — and Director Mueller and Comey credited (without a sound basis) the reliability of the bloodhound evidence — the pages relating to the research involving the Ames supplled the former Zawahiri associate should have been obtained no later than 2002.

    Then Tarek could have been asked who he knew. For example, did he know the subtilis expert Walied Samarrai who was calling Ramzi Yousef, KSM’s nephew, regularly through February 1993 leading up to the WTC 1993 explosion. WS reportedly lived 3 miles from the mailbox in 2001.

    Where was the DARPA aerosol experiments done? Who participated in making a dried aerosol out of Flask 1029 besides FBI anthrax expert John Ezzell and his assistant Terry Abshire?

    They were done at Southern Research Institute? Right? Where Patricia Fellows then went to head the B3?

    A GAO probe is not sufficient. There needs to a Congressional investigation.

    • DXer said

      Now this blog long ago raised the question raised by this log and these initials. Mr. Willman does not cite the document and instead relies on interviews with the architect of the Ivins Theory, Lawrence Alexander and also Darin Steele.

      In reconstructing the history of such an important issue dating to 2002, one would want to rely on the documentary evidence and not the understanding of the fellow who has the theory. The entire point is to test a given theory against the documentary evidence. The “facts” are established by the documents not the accusations and claims. This blog looks forward to Mr. Willman pointing to the documentary evidence establishing that Dr. Ivins rather than Pat Fellows submitted the April 2002 samples. Dr. Ivins in numerous interviews had recollected that Pat did.

  26. DXer said

    On March 18, 2008, Dr. Ivins wrote Mara Linscott:

    “I’m sorry that you have abandoned me. You were the one person I knew I could bare my soul to and tell everything to, and now you have abandoned me. You have put me on your dark list… I lose my connections. I lose my years. I lose my health. I lose my ability to think. I lose my friends. What do I have left but eternity?”

    • DXer said

      The next day, after an apparent suicide attempt, he writes: “The state smells its carnivorous death-blood sacrifice. I look into the mirror and cry out who it is.”

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: