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

* November 28, 2011 Letter from FBI Director Robert Mueller: He Objected To The FBI Losing Jurisdiction Over Terrorists In the US In Favor Of Military

Posted by DXer on November 29, 2011




6 Responses to “* November 28, 2011 Letter from FBI Director Robert Mueller: He Objected To The FBI Losing Jurisdiction Over Terrorists In the US In Favor Of Military”

  1. DXer said

    “Should somebody when it’s been determined … to be a member of an enemy force who has come to this nation or is in this nation to attack us as a member of a foreign enemy, should that person be treated according to the laws of war? And the answer is yes,” said Levin, D-Mich.

    The bill would require military custody of a suspect deemed to be a member of al-Qaida or its affiliates and involved in plotting or committing attacks on the United States. “We’re fighting a war, not a crime,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.


    I have no opinion on the complex policy and law enforcement issue presented but it presents an interesting practical dilemma for members of the Vanguards of Conquest/Egyptian Islamic Jihad or Egyptian Islamic Group members in the United States. If Mahmoud Mahjoub told CSIS that so-and-so was VOC — or if Jaballah did — then with a new Sheriff coming to town the bad guys may want to get out of Dodge.

  2. DXer said

    The FBI may tell you in classified briefings that Al-TImimi is cooperating.

    But given he was the former assistant to the White House Chief of Staff Andy Card … and his father worked at the Iraqi embassy … and even after 9/11 he was allowed to share a suite with DARPA-funded Ames anthrax researchers…

    do you think maybe it is time to stop deferring to the guy, the DIrector, who each morning would have the door opened for him by Andy Card .. with Andy asking how Amerithrax was going?

    “It’s a little more complicated than that.”

    • DXer said

    • DXer said

      Conflict of interest allegations are difficult to sort out.

      In Amerithrax, it would take the expertise of the Government Accountability Office to do so.

      But given Andrew Card’s conflict-of-interest, he should have recused himself from having any role or input on Amerithrax and should not have been privy to FBI’s regular briefings.

      Bernie Fine Scandal: Dennis DuVal, Former Syracuse Chief [of Police] & Player, Reportedly Knew Of Abuse Allegations

      • DXer said

        Moreover, given that while 700 had access to virulent Ames, only a handful had made a dried powder out of it. One was the FBI’s anthrax expert John E. He therefore should have been excluded despite his years of experience working for the FBI’s hazardous pathogens people. He especially should have been excluded from the collection of samples — as highlighted by the fact that his lab did not submit a sample of RMR 1029 that they had used to make the dried powder and then the FBI threw out the sample submitted by Ivins in February 2002.

        • DXer said

          Another FBI leading scientist, JB, permitted Ali Al-Timimi unfettered access to the largest microbiological repository collection in the world (at ATTC), to include a confidential patent repository. He had been the collections scientist. That issue too involves conflict of interest issues requiring review by the experts at GAO.

          Were conflicts such as these solved by a “Chinese Wall”? Or did such compartmentalization merely increase the likelihood that it go off on track?

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: