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

* On April 24, 2007, Dr. Ivins was advised that the records relating to use of the B3 suite in Building 1425 were available but then the person forgot the request until well after the grand jury appearance. If not spoliated, those documents should now be produced .

Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 7, 2011

******

******

******

******

Advertisements

3 Responses to “* On April 24, 2007, Dr. Ivins was advised that the records relating to use of the B3 suite in Building 1425 were available but then the person forgot the request until well after the grand jury appearance. If not spoliated, those documents should now be produced .”

  1. DXer said

    And USAMRIID should look really hard for the records because it would be highly inappropriate to destroy records relating to decontamination of biolevel 3 suites during the relevant period of the mailings — directly relevant to a grand jury investigation and national security investigation. We have seen an uploaded email by Dr. Ivins about a planned decontamination that was going to have to be scheduled around an animal experiment of B3 in early October. The date is highly relevant. Was the decontamination done BEFORE or AFTER the nights that the FBI speculates that Dr. Ivins made a dried powder? If BEFORE, it seems to me that it would tend to be exculpatory. If AFTER, it seems to me to tend to be inculpatory. While I don’t specifically know, decontamination of anthrax that I’ve seen in other contexts involves use of paraformaldehyde — the use of which is governed by a different government agency. Formal record of its use has to be made and kept because of the hazards associated with the compound. Its use has to be certified. (For example, it was certified at ISU; and once used in an off-the-books decontamination at the Merck vaccine facility). At USAMRIID, it is done by special personnel who would keep their own records — and given that they are not voluminous, would have zero reason not to keep them. If such records support the FBI’s Ivins Theory, why didn’t they rely on them?

  2. DXer said

    Clinton warns of terrorist bio-attacks

    By CNN’s Elise Labott

    http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/07/clinton-warns-of-terrorist-bio-attacks/

    She called for renewed efforts to prevent outbreaks and attacks and develop responses for when they do occur, pointing to the 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States that killed five people and forced more than 10,000 people to be put on antibiotics. …

    Clinton also called for increased reporting and transparency by countries to guard against the misuse of biological materials, as well as improved international coordination and strengthening public health systems to detect and respond to outbreaks.

    Comment: Secretary Clinton calls for increased transparency and yet the FBI doesn’t respond to simple, easily fulfilled FOIA requests relating to centrally important, non-exempt documents. How would Secretary Clinton like it if Pakistan shredded the depositions of the two key lab assistants working with Aafia Siddiqui in 2002 at the Karachi Institute of Technology?

    How would she like it if its key government expert had made a dried powder using the genetically matching strain, not submitted a sample to the repository and the government had denied making a dried powder at all? In Amerithrax, the FBI Director took 7 months to respond to a simple and direct question by Congressman Nadler and then the response submitted was gobbledygook (the apparent result of a typo).

    If you want to encouraging transparency, then lead by example.

    If you want to justify secrecy on the grounds that Al-Timimi is a Top Echelon Informant, then expect his participation in the program be subject to the same scrutiny as in the case of Whitey Bulger. But expect the scrutiny to begin within 2 years rather than 20 — after a mass attack on DC and New York.

  3. DXer said

    Did Dr. Ivins’ attorney make a copy of the notebooks before submitting them to the grand jury? If not, why not?

    If he did, why is keeping them to himself if they are helpful to Dr. Ivins’ position?

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: