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

* Under The Protocol Involving Rabbits and Formaldehyde Implemented in Late September 2001 and Early October 2001, Dr. Ivins Was Tasked With Monitoring The Animals After Challenge

Posted by DXer on January 1, 2012




9 Responses to “* Under The Protocol Involving Rabbits and Formaldehyde Implemented in Late September 2001 and Early October 2001, Dr. Ivins Was Tasked With Monitoring The Animals After Challenge”

  1. DXer said

    The rabbits were challenged on or about October 2, 2001. They had been brought into the B3 the week prior to that to acclimatize to the B3. Stephen Little did not work in the B3 and so was not in a position to help with the rabbits. Animal lab tech Anthony Bassett, according to Kristi Friend in her recently produced civil deposition, began working that first week of October 2001, hired out of the Army. Thus, if Ms. Friend’s recollection of the chronology is correct, that first week in late September, it would have fallen on Dr. Ivins to do what others were not in a position to do. But AB is the one to ask as to precise start date.

    Although Ms. Friend was Dr. Ivins’ assistant, she was tasked to DSD/ Ezzell’s lab after the mailings.

  2. DXer said

    What’s really behind Hillary Clinton’s latest wave of speeches?
    By Erin McPike, CNN
    updated 11:10 AM EDT, Sat October 26, 2013


    Both Obama and Hillary Clinton, based on their speeches, seem very smart. As the current President and a very possible future President, how would they best understand whether Bruce Ivins was innocent given the wide-ranging critical issues before them? Don’t they have to delegate given their many responsibilities? The former FBI WMD head Vahid Majidi reached, IMO, what was a good faith opinion on his theory of the case when he was appointed. A senior DOJ official, he was relying on briefing from below. With the science case unravelled and in ruins, he in turn now at least is confident that the new FBI Director James Comey will cover his back.

    Simply put however: Dr. Majidi’s false claim “Ivins had no reason to be in the lab” simply is not true. The false claim was the key foundation of his Ivins Theory.

    So how do all these smart, hardworking, good faith people like Obama and Clinton come to have an independent understanding about Dr. Ivins work on the animal formaldehyde experiment with the 52 rabbits when their subordinates act as if there was no such experiment? Decision-makers must demand the relevant contemporaneous documents. Then they compare it to the Amerithrax Investigative Summary and see that rabbits were never mentioned by the FBI. Not in the press conferences, not in the Amerithrax Investigative Summary — not ever.

    As attorneys, both Obama and Hillary would recognize that the prosecutor and investigator were operating in what Hillary calls an “evidence free” zone. It was not based on ideology — as HC so aptly applies it. But her notion of “evidence free zone” applies with equal force to true crime analysis. In this contest, they understand the best evidence consists of the relevant documentary evidence showing what Ivins was working on such as Lab Notebook 4241, the invoice for the shipping of the rabbts on 9/24, and the contemporaneous emails describing the results upon the early October 2001 challenge (which was done by injection rather than aerosol).

    Now where can a member of the media obtain a copy of the Animal Protocol B1-11? In theory, FOIA should just require an email to Sandra. It could be asked to be uploaded. At the USAMRIID Reading Room under protocols, however, there are just a handful of disparate documents related to B1-011. One sheet includes some data from Covance earlier in September 2001. Another provides a summary. But to write it up in ProPublica, McClatchy, Frontline fashion, one would want it tied up in a bow in an authoritative Animal Protocol. It otherwise is hard to piece a timeline together given the welter of experiments and revised schedules over time.

    I don’t know why I was unable to get a copy. It wasn’t for the lack of trying.

    Patricia Fellows and Anthony Bassett did not respond to my emails. Neither did Stephen F. Little.

    Dr. Fellow’s civil deposition was shredded by DOJ.

    The civil deposition of Mara Linscott was also shredded by DOJ. She was the scientist who in the 302 statement had said checking on the animals at night and weekends was a one-person job that would take a couple of hours.

    Now in light of the announcement of the approval of the protocol — without any discussion of revisions — I presently am working on the hypothesis that Animal Protocol B1-11 is exactly the same in substance as the Proposal 1-28. The Animal Protocol person wrote Ivins to tell him on July 23, 2001 to say it was approved. Ivins forwarded it to his colleague saying “Yesssss!!!”

    In advance of the future Presidential campaign, Hillary’s conservative opponents are developing Benghazi as one of their memes. Mohammed Zawawhiri was associated with that attack on that embassy . Mohammed Zawahiri, IMO, was also associated with the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings. I have been writing about him and the importance to analysis for over 10 years. It was his rendition that caused Dr. Ayman Zawahiri to double-down on his efforts to develop anthrax as a weapon to retaliate for the rendering of senior EIJ leaders to include Blind Sheik Abdel-Rahman and his brother Mohammed, who was rendered in Spring of 1999. It was a scientist taught by Mohammed sister Heba who was supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins. Heba understandably cried herself to sleep each night over Mohammed’s rendition and was worried sick over the lack of news. CIA: Let’s not get this the anthrax mailings wrong too in explaining things to the public. Otherwise Hillary, if elected, is going to be really pissed someone got her in another jam.

    Sometimes to learn from our lessons we need to rely less on our subordinate (FBI Director Comey) whose subordinate (Vahid Majidi) expressly says in a September 2013 book that he is counting on Director Comey to cover his ass. Instead of covering anyone’s back, we need to focus on keeping the country safe from a WMD attack. Anyone standing for the truth established by the reliable documentary evidence will have no trouble moving forward in their career. I wish them the same lucrative career that US Attorney Taylor went on to after his spin and numerous factual errors at the August 2008 press conference. But it is by standing behind truth in moving forward that one will find a safe harbor. No one should fault someone for being wrong — only for not correcting things in moving forward. Montooth and Lieber and Alexander and Majidi and the others should understand that other authorities have all their emails and texts. There are no secrets about what they knew and when they knew it.

    Sometimes a smart person like Obama or Hillary will have to cut through the BS spin and conclusory conjecture of subordinates — and have someone ask AUSA Rachel Lieber and Agent Lawrence Alexander to provide all documents relating to the formaldehyde experiment. They should have them explain why the experiment was not disclosed at the August 2008 press conferences.

    I can prove through documents in the public domain that AUSA Lieber and the investigators, including Ed Montooth, have known about the rabbit experiment for years — and knew that checking on the animals was a one person job that took a couple of hours daily.

    Moving forward, these folks are either part of the solution or part of the problem. Ed’s general comment: “I’m comfortable with an Ivins Theory” simply does not cut it. Address the 52 rabbits or STFU.

    If you want someone to cover your back, please make up for by voting today or tomorrow (1-click, no fuss, no muss) for this mean-looking pumpkin titled “Gourd Rage.”.

    There is only one Joker who still needs to be crushed.

  3. DXer said

    I thought Hillary was very impressive at Colgate tonight.

    The phrase used at Hamilton that she used again tonight was “evidence free” zone.

    In a 2 pager, some intelligence analyst would be able to explain why the FBI’s claim that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab was not true.

    WIld, fun time at the end as crowds crossed athletic fields only to find gates locked — and so little old ladies had to be hoisted over fences.

  4. DXer said

    Dr. Ivins gave a preliminary report on the challenge on October 11, 2001.

    Click to access 20011016_10_16_2011_emailAttachments(redacted).pdf

    NGRAV PDT Meeting October 11,2001 1500 to 1600 Attendees:
    (b )
    (b)(6) (6)
    B. Ivins, .
    Dr. Bruce Ivins presented preliminary results obtained in rabbits from the Battelle study comparing five year old preps of rPA vaccine w/ and w/o formaldehyde. Early animal data (3 days and one week) indicate stability/potency may be enhanced by the presence of formaldehyde (note: difference in survival at one week is not statistically significant). Review of the SDS-PAGE gels presented by suggest formaldehyde is not needed as a stabilizing agent. ACTION: Bruce to design follow up experiment using vaccines at time zero prepared w/ and w/o formaldehyde, 6 week sub cu challenge (125 LD50), one shot @ 50 ug. USAMRIID does not have data from any previous study which used a sub cu, 6 week challenge w/ a single dose.

  5. DXer said

    I will try to have uploaded the July 23, 2001 emails when he says “YESSSSS!!!” upon being notified the proposal 01-28 had been approved.

    It was “Approved and assigned protocol number B01-11.”

  6. DXer said

    Patricia Fellows was the other person in charge of monitoring the animals. Her civil deposition was shredded.

    Maybe Senator Leahy was right when in February 2011, Senator Leahy angrily said: “it’s not closed.”

    • Sen. Leahy on anthrax case: ‘It’s not closed’ – Washington Post › Politics‎

    Feb 16, 2011 – After the deadly shooting rampage in Tucson, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) was asked to reflect on his own experience as the would-be target of …
    • All results for Leahy “It’s not closed.” »

    It was only after the matter was officially closed which was when the federal undercover said he was authorized to help me with the graphics.

    And if I followed NSA’s example, I would surreptitiously record all conversations as a matter of course; invite FBI agents to my kitchen table so I can videotape and record them etc.

    The key to sound analysis is the sharing of information.

    The US might learn more from straightforward document disclosure and document analysis than spying on friends.

  7. richard rowley said

    I hate to say this, because it verges on, no actually crosses over into disrespect, but whereas in 2008 I took the suspicions about Ivins as being at least reasonable and formed in good faith, the subsequent revelations about the lyophilizer, the suppressed report of the questioned document examiners, the ‘reversed’ polygraph results, and now this material about animal challenges make me conclude that no one who counted on the Task Force was doing
    any thinking. Or any thinking beyond “how can I prove that I’m a team player?”.

    A case as cautionary tale.

  8. DXer said

    It’s time to upload a copy of an unredacted copy of B01-11, the animal protocol relating to the formaldehyde/ rabbit experiment that Dr. Ivins was working in late September 2001 and early October 2001 when the AUSAs speculated Dr. Ivins was powderizing anthrax that was then used to murder people.

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: