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

* watch FRONTLINE’s ANTHRAX PROGRAM NOW !!!

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 11, 2011

******

******

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/anthrax-files/

Advertisements

15 Responses to “* watch FRONTLINE’s ANTHRAX PROGRAM NOW !!!”

  1. DXer said

    I’m not up-to-date but I believe a decision on the Emmy nomination is forthcoming within a week or two.

  2. DXer said

    Here is the Frontline show. Imagine what they could have done if they had the notebook pages just produced when AUSA Lieber claimed he had no reason to be in the lab the first week of October. (The 52 rabbits were moved into the B3 on September 24 ; pursuant to the protocol, the rabbits needed to be acclimatized for a week).

  3. DXer said

    Congratulations to Frontline, ProPublica and McClatchy for the much deserved Emmy nomination of “Anthrax Files” for Outstanding Investigative Journalism. The body of work resulting from the partnership was important and influential.

  4. DXer said

    Questions remain 10 years after anthrax mailings

    As research increases at Fort Detrick, some people continue to doubt FBI’s findings in bioterrorist attack

    by Katherine Heerbrandt, Staff Writer
    http://www.gazette.net/article/20111012/NEWS/710129418/1009/questions-remain-10-years-after-anthrax-mailings&template=gazette

  5. DXer said

    Bioterror ‘Report Card’ to Show More Work Ahead

    Anthrax attacks killed five and infected 17 others in October 2001. The Federal Bureau of Investigation released a report last year that said Dr. Bruce Ivins, an army biodefense researcher, was responsible for the attacks. Dr. Ivins committed suicide before charges were filed. The FBI’s conclusions have been controversial, with many scientists arguing that Dr. Ivins wasn’t behind the plot.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204450804576625261768268384.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

    Comment: It’s government policy at its worst when billions in pork barrel money is spent while DOJ is allowed not to produce the nonexempt documents under FOIA … and close its case on a woman whose lab notebook Dr. Ivins hid a quarter century ago who had a gut feeling that it was Dr. Ivins.

    If these Senators were truly concerned about avoiding an WMD attack they will pick up the phone and call the DOJ and urge prompt compliance with FOIA with respect to the pending requests. And it wouldn’t cost a time. It would just be getting to the production sooner.

    With the documentary evidence about Dr. Ayman using “school’ as code for EIJ and his close associates announcing his plans to use anthrax against US targets in retailation for the rendering of senior EIJ leaders — Amerithrax represents the greatest failure in intelligence analysis in United States history.

  6. Notice there were no physicists or even chemists on either show. None of the Livermore and Sandia people were on at all.

    Physicists tend to be read into more than biologists. In academia, they also tend to know more about what other departments are up to as does math. Medical schools are often off by themselves. Livermore has always been one of the most secretive government labs.

    DOJ didn’t want any of the physicists or even chemists exposed to Frontline either on air or even off air very likely. It would be interesting to know if Frontline asked to talk to some of them and was refused.

  7. Anonymous said

    All in all a very damning picture of the FBI and DOJ. Mueller is especially painted extermely poorly, as well as the FBI’s tactics pursuing Ivins with no evidence.

    At one point (around 34 minutes) they reveal a DOJ document that has been redacted. This is in connection with the FBI’s claim that Ivins submitted a sample to fool them. Frontline found the unredacted page and compared them. The paragraph in the unredacted page shows a thrid sample that Ivins submitted that DID have all 4 morphs. They make it clear that they beleive the paragraph was redacted so they could continue to accuse Ivins of submitting a false sample.

    • Excellent point. This is deliberate falsification with the public as the intended victim. This is after Ivins is dead so there is no reason to hold back that paragraph. This is the smoking paragraph that proves obstruction of Congress. It also is an accessory after the fact type evidence for the original anthrax mailing if someone else did it.

      • DXer said

        I’m at 40 minutes and think it would be a major travesty if the show is not given major awards.

        But I’m curious about that redacted form which I found very dramatic based on the oral narrative…

        but compare the actual text to the statement apparently drafted by Terry Abshire under the FBIR / repository heading at the USAMRIID FOIA reading room.. Is it clear that it is a 302 interview statement?

        I would need to see the Terry narrative in response to a FOIA request and the actual screen image.

        Or compare the screen image to the corresponding 302 interview statement.

        If they are correct, then GAO should rip the DOJ a new a—hole for their redaction practices (which overall should be reviewed in terms of GAO’s government accountability mandate).

        I so want my daughter to marry someone involved in a production of a documentary so good! 🙂

        In comparison, the CNN show was crap.

  8. anonymous said

    Ya gotta love Rachel. She would have moved to exclude the NYP 10.77% silicon reading. Even although the AFIP results back it up. I guess that means she would have moved to exclude the AFIP results as well – if Frontline had bothered asking her.

    http://www.propublica.org/article/fbi-science-id-anthrax-killer

    David A. Relman, vice chairman of the National Academy study committee and a professor at the Stanford University School of Medicine, said the scientific picture remained incomplete.

    Relman said, for example, that the high level of silicon measured in the letter sent to the New York Post remained a “big discrepancy,” one for which the panel received no explanation. None of the spores in Ivins’ now-infamous flask contained any silicon.

    Relman said the panel questioned FBI officials about whether the high silicon measurement had arisen from an anomaly in the testing.

    “We asked: Is it nonrepresentative sampling?” he said.

    “And they said, ‘No, we don’t think that’s the answer.’ ”

    “There is no answer,” Relman said, “That’s why we said it’s not resolved.”

    Lieber, the prosecutor, said she would have moved to exclude the high-silicon reading at trial since it came from a single measurement.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: