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

* By email dated July 16, 2001, Dr. Ivins forwarded a recently approved protocol ; this attachment is important to obtain under FOIA

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 17, 2011

***

***

Advertisements

14 Responses to “* By email dated July 16, 2001, Dr. Ivins forwarded a recently approved protocol ; this attachment is important to obtain under FOIA”

  1. DXer said

    There are 6 important documents under FOIA that will be uploaded next week (and only an outside chance they will be up tomorrow morning).

  2. DXer said

    I requested the depositions under FOIA. DOJ Civil Division denied my request, noting the protective orders.

    Mr. Kovakas is a highly experienced FOIA officer and has invited a narrowed request for documents from that litigation.

    As for these particular depositions, however, he would cite the protective order.

    Thus, it is under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) that governs and it will require a motion before the court by a non-profit or media organization.

    I requested the documents from USAMRIID but they referred it to DOJ Civil Division.

    kovakas Jim (CIV)

    Absent the protective order, the nine exemptions to the FOIA address issues of sensitivity and personal rights. They are (as listed in Title 5 of the United States Code, section 552):

    (A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order;[5]
    related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency;[5]

    specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than section 552b of this title), provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be withheld;[5] FOIA Exemption 3 Statutes
    trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential;[5]

    inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters which would not be available by law to a party other than an agency in litigation with the agency;[5]

    personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;[5]

    records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication, (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, (D) could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source, including a State, local, or foreign agency or authority or any private institution which furnished information on a confidential basis, and, in the case of a record or information compiled by a criminal law enforcement authority in the course of a criminal investigation or by an agency conducting a lawful national security intelligence investigation, information furnished by a confidential source, (E) would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions, or would disclose guidelines for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions if such disclosure could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law, or (F) could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual;[5]

    contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions;[5] or
    geological and geophysical information and data, including maps, concerning wells.[5]

  3. On this anniversary of the Kennedy Assassination, we can notice that the Warren Commission report is far superior to the DOJ/FBI report for Amerithrax.

    http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/

    • 26 volume supplement of witness testimony by actual full witness name.

      http://www.history-matters.com/archive/contents/wc/contents_wh.htm

      • This is what the report looks like when the government is not covering up.

      • What you won’t find? Secrecy agreements covering basic witness testimony and depositions of fact witnesses present at key events or stages of the WC’s theory of the events.

        Any person who witnessed some event the WC believed was part of the events did not have any secrecy agreement or sealing of their testimony.

      • No coworker of Oswald had their testimony or deposition sealed in whole or in part. Nor of Ruby.

        The FOIA was intended to be a permanent Warren Commission and to follow the WC as a guide.

        This means in any event like the Kennedy Assassination, the person the government said did it, especially if killed prior to trial is supposed to have everything around them disclosed in full.

        The WC released the full testimony of every person who knew Oswald. This is the standard the FOIA embodies. It is intended that all government employees be guided by the example of the WC in disclosing fully all information in cases like the Kennedy Assassination.

      • The FOIA is something we are entitled to. It is not something the DOJ gets to put aside when it is convenient for it. We have the right to the testimony of every coworker of Bruce Ivins including their full name and employment status at the time.

        This is the standard the WC showed and was the basis of the 1966 FOIA signed by President Lyndon Johnson.

        • The WC and FOIA were both important to LBJ because he became president from the Kennedy Assassination by Oswald. LBJ wanted to make all the witness testimony of everyone who knew Oswald fully available to the public. LBJ in the FOIA wanted to impose this as a requirement on federal government workers in any future case, especially where the person died before trial.

          Ivins died while under observation by the FBI. Just like Oswald died while in police custody. Both were unnatural deaths. Both trigger the fullest possible disclosure of every person who knew them.

  4. DXer said

    Science and Technology RSS Feed

    21 November 2011
    Anthrax Has Been Widely Feared Since the 2001 Anthrax Attacks in the United States
    http://www.voanews.com/learningenglish/home/science-technology/Anthrax-Has-Been-Widely-Feared-Since-the-2001-Anthrax-Attacks-in-the-United-States-134281778.html

    • DXer said

      AP
      A photograph of the letter containing anthrax that was sent to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle

      Years later, federal investigators named a scientist, Bruce Edwards Ivins, as the only suspect in the murders. He was an anthrax expert who worked at the biological defense center in Maryland, where the bacteria was kept. The government was preparing to charge him when he killed himself in two thousand eight.

      CHRISTOPHER CRUISE: Recently, an investigation requested by Congress suggested that Bruce Ivins may have been falsely suspected. Other investigators and news organizations also have studied the case and questioned the evidence against Mr. Ivins.

      Government lawyers say there is no reason for debate. The lawyers say they know they found the right person. But questions about the case have caused concern among some people. They believe that if Bruce Ivins was innocent, the person who sent the letters containing anthrax might still be free.

      Comment: Is it true that “government lawyers say there is no reason for debate”? I don’t recall hearing AUSA Kohl speak to the question in over 3 years. He was the lead AUSA.

  5. DXer said

    The Day Terror Came to Oxford

    It was 10 years ago today when 94-year-old Ottilie Lundgren became the fifth victim of the national anthrax attacks.

    By Paul Singley

    http://southbury.patch.com/articles/the-day-terror-came-to-oxford

    • If DOJ had really got their man, wouldn’t they want GAO, Frontline and the public to know it? But they don’t seem to. Where are the lab notebooks? Also the lab times in BSL3 for the entire team and the depositions of the lab mates.

  6. DXer said

    “We’re going to have to go into the server room from the outside.”

    “We?”

    Ghost Protocol

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: