* DXer summarizes the documentary evidence relating to Dr. Ivins work with rabbits (nowhere mentioned by the DOJ) which demolishes the FBI’s claim that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab
Posted by DXer on July 3, 2012
The FBI has no case against this man … but meanwhile he is dead and the real perpetrators are still out there.
Here is the documentary evidence showing the FBI’s “Ivins Theory” — which was premised on the false and mistaken claim that Dr. Ivins time in the B3 was unexplained — was crock. Look at the Amerithrax Investigative Summary and you can see that the word “rabbits” is never mentioned.
Special thanks go to the unflagging efforts and good faith of the USAMRIID FOIA personnel who doggedly responded to innumerable requests; Lew, the Harvard MBA and former head of a lab with B3 facilities who has taken the time out from traveling the world to upload the documents; and the supremely talented and confidence-inspiring graphic artist who made graphics that never ceased to thrill me.
In the rush of events of the Spring and early Summer 2008, it is easy to drop the ball as happened with the AUSA marshalling the evidence in Amerithrax about how Dr. Ivins spent his time in the B3. At the same time, it takes a special stamina to pick up the ball back and run down the field with it in the face of BS PR spin from DOJ’s highest officials.
Dr. Ivins and his skilled counsel explained that his work with the animals was why he was in the lab but they did not have access to the documents from years before — many of the documents were kept by others. Obtaining the documents under FOIA literally took years.
And of course, the DOJ is on the record explaining that they will never give Congress the documents showing when they first learned that there were problems with the investigation.
Additional documents, that are not yet uploaded, paint a picture that would cause you weep for Dr. Ivins and the unfairness that an Ivins Theory was not required to be supported by the evidence.
1. In a Sept 23, 2011 letter to Senator Grassley, the DOJ says that Dr. Ivins made the dried powder in B5 using the lyophilizer even though the DOJ has proved he was in B3 tending to the rabbits, not B5 (the BL-2 lab), at the time the DOJ alleges he made the dried powder. THAT is the contradiction.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 16, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/in-a-sept-23-2011-letter-to-senator-grassley-the-doj-says-that-dr-ivins-made-the-dried-powder-in-b5-using-the-lyophilizer-even-though-the-doj-has-proved-he-was-in-b3-tending-to-the-rabbits-not-b/
2. AMERITHRAX prosecutors and investigators have never discussed what the newly released documents show about Dr. Ivins work with rabbits involved and those same documents were available to the FBI before Dr. Ivins’ killed himself.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 14, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/amerithrax-prosecutors-and-investigators-have-never-discussed-what-the-newly-released-documents-show-about-dr-ivins-work-with-rabbits-involved-and-those-same-documents-were-available-to-the-fbi-bef/
3. Document produced today to DXer discussing shipment of 52 rabbits week of September 24, 2001 for formaldehyde study
Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 31, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/document-produced-today-to-dxer-discussing-shipment-of-52-rabbits-week-of-september-24-2001-for-formaldehyde-study/
4. The lyophilizer in Building 1425 was in Suite B5, not Suite B3 where Dr. Ivins was on the nights in question (where he was doing the study with the 52 rabbits)
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 11, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/the-lyophilizer-in-building-1425-was-in-suite-b5-not-suite-b3-where-dr-ivins-was-on-the-nights-in-question-where-he-was-doing-the-study-with-the-52-rabbits/
5. In an Oct 5, ’01 email among the materials provided by USAMRIID this week, Dr. Ivins explains the results 3 days after the challenge of rabbits in the formaldehyde experiment; the word “rabbits” has never passed the prosecutor’s lips
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 24, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/in-an-oct-5-01-email-among-the-materials-provided-by-usamriid-this-week-dr-ivins-explains-the-results-3-days-after-the-challenge-of-rabbits-in-the-formaldehyde-experiment-the-word-rabbits/
6. In Advance Of The October 1, 2001 Rabbit Challenge, The 52 Rabbits Nowhere Mentioned By Prosecutors Needed To Be Moved Into The B3 Suite 7 Days Earlier (And Documents Establish That They Were)
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 13, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/in-advance-of-the-october-1-2001-rabbit-challenge-the-rabbits-nowhere-mentioned-by-prosecutors-needed-to-be-moved-into-the-b3-suite-7-days-earlier-and-documents-establish-that-they-were/
7. As Dr. Ivins often explained, conducting a rabbit study such as the one involving 52 rabbits in early October 2001 always depended on the availability of hot suite space.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 1, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/as-dr-ivins-often-explained-conducting-a-rabbit-study-such-as-the-one-involving-52-rabbits-in-early-october-2001-always-depended-on-the-availability-of-hot-suite-space/
8. Handwritten notes produced by USAMRIID this week summarizing rabbit contract with Covance involving formaldehyde
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 24, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/handwritten-notes-produced-by-usamriid-this-week-summarizing-rabbit-contract-with-covance-involving-formaldehyde/
9. In response to Dr. Ivins’ October 5, 2001 email discussing the rabbit deaths over the last three days, the participants in the study that day discussed by email the implications for further study
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/in-response-to-dr-ivins-october-5-2001-email-discussing-the-rabbit-deaths-over-the-last-three-days-the-participants-in-the-study-that-day-discussed-by-email-the-implications-for-further-study/
10. NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION: 10 days after the rabbits had been challenged on October 1, 2001, Dr. Ivins presented preliminary results from the Battelle study involving the 5 year old preps of rPA vaccine w/ and w/o formaldehyde.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 24, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/not-for-public-distribution-10-days-after-the-rabbits-had-been-challenged-on-october-1-2001-dr-ivins-presented-preliminary-results-from-the-battelle-study-involving-the-5-year-old-preps-of-rpa-v/
11. 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 Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/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/
12. Hickory Dickory Doc: The mice ran up the clock and Dr. Ivins time in the BL-3 lab in late September 2001 but not as much as the rabbits did in early October 2001.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/hickory-dickory-doc-the-mice-ran-up-the-clock-and-dr-ivins-time-in-the-bl-3-lab-in-late-september-2001-but-not-as-much-as-the-rabbits-did-in-early-october-2001/
13. Under The Mouse Protocol (As Under The Rabbit Protocol), Dr. Ivins Was Tasked With Taking Part In Immunization, Bleeding, Challenge And Observation Of The Animals
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/under-the-mouse-protocol-as-under-the-rabbit-protocol-dr-ivins-was-tasked-with-taking-part-in-immunization-bleeding-challenge-and-observation-of-the-animals/
14. Under The Protocol Involving Rabbits and Formaldehyde Relating To The Early October 2001 Challenge, The Rabbits Were To Be Euthanized By Injection Of Euthasol By Animal Tech Lab Anthony Bassett, Who Can Describe The Experiment
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/under-the-protocol-involving-rabbit-sand-formaldehyde-relating-to-the-early-october-2001-challenge-the-rabbits-were-to-be-euthanized-by-injection-of-euthasol-by-animal-tech-lab-anthony-bassett-who/
15. Did AUSA Lieber and Agent Montooth understand Dr. Ivins’ trips to the “AR” from the hot suites as trips to a locked cabinet in “Animal Resources” to get the Ketamine and Euthasol needed to anesthesize and euthanize moribund mice and rabbits? See DEA (part of DOJ) Controlled Substance log.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 11, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/11/did-ausa-lieber-and-agent-montooth-understand-dr-ivins-trips-to-the-ar-from-the-hot-suites-as-trips-to-a-locked-cabinet-in-animal-resources-to-get-the-euthasol-needed-to-euthanize-moribun/
16. 12 rabbits then died on day 3 and 4 and more on day 5; Ivins time then spent the extra time on those nights; AUSA Rachel Lieber got her facts seriously wrong in the investigative summary; DOJ should have required citations to the record.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 3, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/12-rabbits-then-died-on-day-3-and-4-and-more-on-day-5-ivins-time-then-spent-the-extra-time-on-those-nights-ausa-rachel-lieber-got-her-facts-seriously-wrong-in-the-investigative-summary-doj-should/
17. Standard Operating Procedures for Animal Assessment and Monitoring: the beautiful Amerithrax AUSA did not appreciate that Dr. Ivins was tasked to do this the first week of October with 52 rabbits.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/standard-operating-procedures-for-animal-assessment-and-monitoring-the-beautiful-amerithrax-ausa-did-not-realize-that-dr-ivins-was-tasked-to-do-this-the-first-week-of-october-with-52-rabbits/
18. In Week 9, the week (September 24th, 2001) the rabbits were shipped from Covance to USAMRIID Building 1425, Suite B3, how long did it take to bleed the 52 rabbits involved in the formaldehyde study?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/in-week-9-the-week-september-24th-2001-the-rabbits-were-shipped-from-covance-to-usamriid-building-1425-suite-b3-how-long-did-it-take-to-bleed-the-52-rabbits-involved-in-the-formaldehyde-study/
19, GAO: With respect to the rabbit formaldehyde study in late Sep and early Oct 2001 involving Bruce Ivins and Patricia Fellows — nowhere mentioned by AUSA Lieber in her investigative summary — did Dr. Fellows address the study in the deposition that the Department of Justice required to be shredded?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/gao-with-respect-to-the-rabbit-formaldehyde-study-in-late-sep-and-early-oct-2001-involving-bruce-ivins-and-patricia-fellows-nowhere-mentioned-by-ausa-lieber-in-her-investigative-summary-did/
20. GAO should obtain the very best contemporaneous documentation relating to Dr. Ivins specific activities with the guinea pigs, mice and rabbits on the nights that DOJ claimed, without evidence, that he was making a dried powder to mail.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 6, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/gao-should-obtain-the-very-best-contemporaneous-documentation-relating-to-dr-ivins-specific-activities-with-the-guinea-pigs-mice-and-rabbits-on-the-nights-that-doj-claimed-without-evidence-that/
21. After Challenge On About Oct 1, 2001, One Of The Investigators On Rabbit/Formaldehyde Study Were Required To Observe The Control Rabbits For The First 7 Days After Challenge ; The AUSA and Investigators Never Mention The Rabbits
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 2, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/after-challenge-on-about-oct-1-2001-one-of-the-investigators-on-rabbitformaldehyde-study-were-required-to-observe-the-control-rabbits-for-the-first-7-days-after-challenge-the-ausa-and-investiga/
22. FBI interview statement: If someone came in off hours it was to work on the animal experiments – this could take approximately two hours and was usually a one-person job.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/fbi-interview-statement-if-someone-came-in-off-hours-it-was-to-work-on-the-animal-experiments-this-could-take-approximately-two-hours-and-was-usually-a-one-person-job/
23. June 14, 2001 LACUS Subcommittee Meeting notice to consider Dr. Ivins’ proposal regarding formadehyde and rabbits.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 2, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/june-14-2001-lacus-subcommittee-meeting-notice-to-consider-dr-ivins-proposal-regarding-formadehyde-and-rabbits/
24. Before Issuing Its Report, GAO Should Seek To Obtain “Animal Room Environment Report” for B310 and B305 in Suite B3, Building 1425 for September – October (for the guinea pigs, mice and rabbits attended to by Dr. Ivins in the B3 under the various protocols implemented those months); Used for each animal room, the forms provide space to record animal observations, cage sanitation schedules, and more.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 2, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/before-issuing-its-report-gao-should-seek-to-obtain-animal-room-environment-report-for-b310-and-b305-in-suite-b3-building-1425-for-september-october-for-the-guinea-pigs-mic/
25. Justice Department Is Said To Be Arguing Against Itself But AUSA Rachel Lieber Has Not Even Yet Addressed The Issue Of The Rabbits Or Produced The Pertinent Contemporaneous Documents Relating To Dr. Ivins’ Work With The Rabbits.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 29, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/justice-department-is-said-to-be-arguing-against-itself-but-ausa-rachel-lieber-has-not-even-yet-addressed-the-issue-of-the-rabbits-or-produced-the-pertinent-contemporaneous-documents-relating-to-dr/
26. Each of the 52 rabbits shipped the week of September 24, 2001 to USAMRIID Building 1425 to join Dr. Ivins in the Biolevel 3 lab had a unique identifying microchip.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 26, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/26/each-of-the-52-rabbits-shipped-the-week-of-september-24-2001-to-usamriid-building-1425-to-join-dr-ivins-in-the-biolevel-3-lab-had-a-unique-identifying-microchip/
28. Like the rabbits shipped to USAMRIID Building 1425 the week of September 24th and acclimated to biolevel 3 for one week before being challenged, the mice similarly were housed in building 1425, not building 1412
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 26, 2011
29. The Animal Technician Shot Out The Cage Cards For The Rabbit Experiment Prior to 2004; the NCOIC, Small Animal Section Was Responsible For Retaining The Used Cards
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 13, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/the-animal-technician-shot-out-the-cage-cards-for-the-rabbit-experiment-prior-to-2004-the-ncoic-small-animal-section-was-responsible-for-retaining-the-used-cards/
30. By January 2003, the animal caretaker had thrown away the individual cage cards on the formaldehyde experiment with the 52 rabbits that Dr. Ivins was doing those nights in the lab in B3 in early October 2001
Posted on November 1, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/by-january-2003-the-animal-caretaker-had-thrown-away-the-individual-cage-cards-on-the-formaldehyde-experiment-with-the-52-rabbits-that-dr-ivins-was-doing-those-nights-in-the-lab-in-b3-in-early-oct/
31. Of The 52 Rabbits In The Early October 2001 Formaldehyde Experiment, How Many Were Exsanguinated Pursuant To This Procedure? All Of Them?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 13, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/of-the-52-rabbits-in-the-early-october-2001-formalidehyde-experiment-how-many-were-exsanguinated-pursuant-to-this-procedure-all-of-them/
32. In an earlier experiment under the rabbit Protocol B00-03, the assistance of Dr. Ivins and two others was offered in connection with the bleeds over the two day period.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/in-an-earlier-experiment-under-the-rabbit-protocol-b00-03-the-assistance-of-dr-ivins-and-two-others-was-offered-in-connection-with-the-bleeds-over-the-two-day-period/
33. Numerous USAMRIID Standard Operating Procedures (all mandatory) controlled the animal husbandry baseline services rendered the rabbits, guinea pigs and mice involved in Dr. Ivins’ experiments in Sep-Oct 2001
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 3, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/numerous-usamriid-standard-operating-procedures-all-mandatory-controlled-the-animal-husbandry-baseline-services-rendered-the-rabbits-guinea-pigs-and-mice-involved-in-dr-ivins-experiments-in-se/
34. Even in Later Protocols Involving Aerosol Challenges Conducted In Building 1412, the Rabbits Would Be Kept In Building 1425, Suite B3 Before And After Aerosol Challenge In 1412 (Where Monitoring Would Continue 21 Days)
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 30, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/30/even-in-later-protocols-involving-aerosol-challenges-conducted-in-building-1412-the-rabbits-would-be-kept-in-building-1425-suite-b3-before-and-after-aerosol-challenge-in-1412-where-monitoring-wou/
35. Dr. Ivins explained that “what’s acceptable as a [rabbit animal protocol is constantly changing]” ; thus it is important that the GAO rely on the rabbit formaldehyde protocol as executed and not earlier draft versions.
Posted on December 9, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/09/dr-ivins-explained-that-whats-acceptable-as-a-rabbit-animal-protocol-is-constantly-changing-thus-it-is-important-that-the-gao-rely-on-the-rabbit-formaldehyde-protocol-as-executed-and-not/
36. After rabbits are challenged on the hot side, as many as three autoclaves are needed just processing cages and other items from the hotside, and it takes time to disinfect, decon and re-set up a room
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 8, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/after-rabbits-are-challenged-on-the-hot-side-as-many-as-three-autoclaves-are-needed-just-processing-cages-and-other-items-from-the-hotside-and-it-takes-time-to-disinfect-decon-and-re-set-up-a-roo/
37. produced today by USAMRIID to the blog under FOIA: June 21, 2001 “PROTOCOL TITLE: Effect of formaldehyde on the potency stability of a candidate human anthrax vaccine in rabbits”
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 17, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/produced-today-by-usamriid-to-the-blog-under-foia-june-21-2001-protocol-title-effect-of-formaldehyde-on-the-potency-stability-of-a-candidate-human-anthrax-vaccine-in-rabbits/
38. In a rabbit protocol provided by USAMRIID today, there is familiar discussion of drugs to be administered to the rabbits – for the Sept/Oct 2001 period, is there a contemporaneous log relating to the administration of drugs such as there is in a hospital?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 15, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/in-a-rabbit-protocol-provided-by-usamriid-today-there-is-familiar-discussion-of-drugs-to-be-administered-to-the-rabbits-for-the-septoct-2001-period-is-there-a-contemporaneous-log-relating-to-th/
39. The scientist who made the large amount of virulent Ames that is missing, who was thanked by the former Zawahiri associate for providing technical assistance re the Ames, is the person who could explain about the rabbits ; but she’s not talking.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 9, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/the-scientist-who-made-the-large-amount-of-virulent-ames-that-is-missing-who-was-thanked-by-the-former-zawahiri-associate-for-providing-technical-assistance-re-the-ames-is-the-person-who-could-exp/
40. Bruce Ivins’ co-authors can explain the rabbit and other animal protocols that applied to the subcutaneous challenges in B3 in Building 1425 conducted in September and October 2001.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 9, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/bruce-ivins-co-authors-can-explain-the-rabbit-and-other-animal-protocols-that-applied-to-the-subcutaneous-challenges-in-b3-in-building-1425-conducted-in-september-and-october-2001/
41. Dr. Ivins preferred a parenteral (subcutaneous) challenge because you could fit 60 rabbits in one room whereas an aerosol challenge would require 4 rooms (1 for animals, 2 hood lines, and 1 spore and bacterial plating)
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 31, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/dr-ivins-preferred-a-parenteral-subcutaneous-challenge-because-you-could-fit-60-rabbits-in-one-room-whereas-an-aerosol-challenge-would-require-4-rooms-1-for-animals-2-hood-lines-and-1-spore-an/
42. It would take 1 hour and 50 minutes to autoclave animal pans and cages (90 minute steam cycle and 20 minute drying cycle)
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 31, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/it-would-take-1-hour-and-50-minutes-to-autoclave-animal-pans-and-cages-90-minute-steam-cycle-and-20-minute-drying-cycle/
CASE CLOSED ... what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks? 
DXer said
These tv actors continue to promote themselves at the expense of Dr. Ivins — who is not here to defend himself.
Let’s consider the actual documentary evidence, shall we?
DXer said
No wonder why these numb nuts couldn’t reconsider Bruce Ivins innocence or guilt, they say they didn’t keep the emails that they quoted and relied upon in the Amerithrax Investigative Summary!
AUSA Lieber, when you said I wouldn’t get any documents under FOIA, I guess you knew why, huh?
The emails you and you colleagues say that you did not keep show why Ivins was in the lab those nights and weekends. His suicide is on you.
Spoliation of evidence should be a crime — especially when done by members of the DOJ or FBI.
DXer said
Trump says market would crash if he’s impeached, wants ‘flipping’ to be illegal
Updated Aug 23, 12:37 PM; Posted Aug 23, 12:30 PM
By The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump, incensed over a deal his longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen cut with prosecutors, says it might be better if “flipping” were illegal because people “just make up lies.”
https://www.syracuse.com/us-news/index.ssf/2018/08/trump_impeachment_market_flipping.html
Comment:
When Patricia Fellows wore a wire on Bruce Ivins at the coffee shop, she was “cooperating” with prosectors and investigators (some of whom had a good faith theory that Bruce Ivins was responsible). But when she failed to explain that Ivins time in the lab was explained by the small animal experiments — to include the rabbits nowhere mentioned in the Amerithrax Investigation Summary — was she being truthful? Or is it that AUSA Lieber just was telling tales in her Amerithrax Investigation Summary. How can you base your theory that Ivins had no reason to be in the lab without acknowledging that the rabbit experiment explained his night and weekend work at the lab.
We won’t know until the FBI complies with FOIA.
President Trump and Attorney Giuliani: If I were the President, I would resign before the next developments. In fact, I would resign before August 31 at 3 p.m.
But if Mr. Trump wants to try to retain power (putting both GOP and the economy at risk) — even though it would be more pleasant to retire to a life of golf and tweeting — I would start standing up for the rule of law and focus on having the FBI comply with FOIA.
Start by giving David Hardy the extra staff he needs to competently do searches.
Amerithrax illustrates Mr. Trump’s suggestion that facts are sometimes spun by investigators and prosecutors have an agenda and then work with a cooperator to spin a narrative.
At the same time, the cooperator may have no idea or knowledge indicating who committed the crime. I have no reason to think that Patricia Fellows knows who committed the Amerithrax crimes. Although I have suggested that Adnan El-Shukrijumah, Ayman Zawahiri, Yazid Sufaat, Mohammed Atef etc. were responsible, it remains an unsolved crime.
Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
US District Court judges have a keen sense of when a party is playing hide-the-ball with documents.
In Dillon’s litigation, the Sep-Oct 2001 that the US is withholding are the very emails that the DOJ considered the most important emails in the largest case in the Bureau’s history. They are from the time that Ivins had to be in the lab those nights and weekends to work on the challenge of the 52 rabbits.
The emails that they refuse to produce are the ones that they used to spin its cotton candy “Ivins Theory” on the basis of which the DOJ closed the case. AUSA Lieber nowhere mentions the rabbits in her Amerithrax Investigative Summary.
NY judge voids Pakistani man’s conviction for aiding al Qaeda
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/ny-judge-voids-pakistani-man-s-conviction-for-aiding-al-qaeda-10496918
But U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein said newly discovered statements made by Khan, al Qaeda operative Ammar al Baluchi and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, called into question whether Paracha knew he was helping al Qaeda.
Stein, who oversaw Paracha’s trial and imposed his sentence, called it a “manifest injustice” to let the conviction stand and granted Paracha’s request, made in November 2008, for a new trial.
The new evidence “would yield a fundamentally different trial and likely create a reasonable doubt favouring Paracha’s theory of the case over the government’s,” Stein wrote.
DXer said
DXer said
In his book, Scott Decker evidences no awareness of the documentary evidence that establishes why Ivins was in the B3 lab for the small animal experiments in August 2001 and September and the first week of October 2001. He neither cites it, discloses it, nor demonstrates mastery of it. He just asserts that Ivins’ answers over the years were vague and inconsistent. Did it ever occur to Scott that maybe he should have honored Ivins’ requests for the documents that the FBI had taken from him? So that his lawyer might better reconstruct his time using documents? (His attorney did all explain to the AUSA but did not have the benefit of the withheld documents). Wasn’t it Scott Decker who was in charge of honoring Ivins’ repeated requests for the notebooks and emails taken by the FBI’s science squad — some of which are still being withheld to this day in violation of the FOIA statute?
DXer said
While boring you with genomics details in his book “Recounting The Anthrax Attacks”, and creating the gloss of his approach being science and evidence-based, Agent Decker actually ignores the relevant evidence — the evidence about Ivins’ reason to be in the B3 lab. In fact, the charts for the animal challenges from August 2001 were withheld until just this past week!
Is it because the FBI finds it so difficult to lay their hands on the notebook? Was Decker’s document control at Tysons Corners equally bad?
Dr. Worsham, Dr. Andrews and Dr. Adamovicz have provided sworn civil deposition testimony on Ivins’ work on numerous animal experiments in Fall 2001
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 27, 2013
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/dr-worsham-dr-andrews-and-dr-adamovicz-have-provided-sworn-civil-deposition-testimony-on-ivins-work-on-numerous-animal-experiments-in-fall-2001/
Dr. Russell Byrne, in his deposition produced today, explained people would have noticed all the plates run through the autoclave night after night because their life depends on paying attention.
Posted on February 22, 2014
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/dr-russell-byrne-in-his-deposition-produced-today-explained-people-would-have-noticed-all-the-plates-run-through-the-autoclave-night-after-night-because-their-life-depends-on-paying-attention/
Colonel Eitzen, the Commander, testified at civil deposition that a two-person rule prior to October 2001 would have been impractical because of the need for work on weekends and nights
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/colonel-eitzen-the-commander-testified-at-civil-deposition-that-a-two-person-rule-prior-to-october-2001-would-have-been-impractical-because-of-the-need-for-work-on-weekends-and-nights/
12 rabbits then died on day 3 and 4 and more on day 5; Ivins time then spent the extra time on those nights; AUSA Rachel Lieber got her facts seriously wrong in the investigative summary; DOJ should have required citations to the record.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 3, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/12-rabbits-then-died-on-day-3-and-4-and-more-on-day-5-ivins-time-then-spent-the-extra-time-on-those-nights-ausa-rachel-lieber-got-her-facts-seriously-wrong-in-the-investigative-summary-doj-should/
DXer said
Under the Mice Protocol, The Animals Were Challenged In B-305 (which is in Suite B3) ; Under This Protocol, Dr. Ivins Was In The B3 Those Nights The AUSA And Investigators Mistakenly Suggested He Had No Reason To Be In That Biolevel-3 Lab
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/under-the-mice-protocol-the-animals-were-challenged-in-b-305-which-is-in-suite-b3-under-this-protocol-dr-ivins-was-in-the-b3-those-nights-the-ausa-and-investigators-mistakenly-suggested-he-h/
The rabbit protocol in this series of experiments was time-sensitive and the procedure needed to be strictly followed ; the time-sensitive nature of the rabbit protocol REQUIRED that Dr. Bruce Ivins be in the lab on those nights on those specified dates
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 8, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/the-rabbit-protocol-in-this-series-of-experiments-was-time-sensitive-and-the-procedure-needed-to-be-strictly-followed-the-time-sensitive-nature-of-the-rabbit-protocol-required-that-dr-bruce-ivins/
The Pulitzer may go to the definitive write-up on the issue of what Dr. Ivins was doing on the nights in September and early October 2001 that the Department of Justice speculated, without any basis, that he was making a dried aerosol powder. The lab notebook pages from those specific nights were only recently produced to DXer and then to this blog under FOIA.
Posted on July 20, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/the-pulitzer-may-go-to-the-definitive-write-up-on-the-issue-of-what-dr-ivins-was-doing-on-the-nights-in-september-and-early-october-2001-that-the-department-of-justice-speculated-without-any-basis/
Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
Vahid Majidi wrote in his e-book that he was confident his former supervisor, then the FBI Director Comey, “has his back.” Well, if Director Comey were briefed and aware of Dr. Ivins’ work with the 52 rabbits, wouldn’t he have wanted the facts to be corrected and set right? The FBI’s claim that Ivins had no reason to be in the lab nights and weekends was FALSE — and should have been known to be false. It was Scott Decker’s job to be on top of this documentation. His book is due out this Spring. Did Scott realize that in 2001 there was a shift from doing the aerosol challenges in Building 1412 to doing parenteral challenges in Building 1425? Challenging the small animals by injection rather than aerosol allowed experiments to be done with fewer personnel — but still required that animal checks be done. They were done 3X’s daily, and included night and weekend checks. With fewer researchers involved, it fell on Dr. Ivins, who lived near the lab, to check on the animals. His assistant, Mara Linscott, explained that it was a one person job and took a couple of hours. Ivins had about the same hours in November and December that he did in August 2001, a point that, without more, undercuts Decker’s conclusions. Just as the bloodhounds were not a smoking gun as to Hatfill, the reliance on Ivins’ hours needed to be informed by an analysis of the lab notebooks showing the reason to be in the lab. If the FBI Laboratory lost, misplaced or intentionally destroyed Lab Notebook 4282 — and could not retrieve it, as has been the case in all these past many years — then it is no wonder Agent Decker thought Ivins had no reason to be in the lab. Separately, ask him if he reviewed the lab top installed in the summer of 2001 to see if Ivins used it to surf porn. (No.) If he didn’t, then maybe his time early on would have been better spent cloning hard drives than having bloodhounds Lucy and Tinkerbell running up to people and smelling their hands.
DXer said
Kenneth Kohl, who I believe is the deputy chief of the national security section for the DC U.S. Attorney, was the lead AUSA in Amerithrax. Like US Attorney Taylor and DC Field Office head Persichini, he, of course, too had many responsibilities. Would he have been responsible for hands-on review of Notebook 4282 or would he be relying on his colleague AUSA Lieber to vet this all-important premise of an Ivins Theory — i.e., whether Ivins had a reason to be in the B3 lab.
Or would someone in the FBI Laboratory had that responsibility.
If the DC US Attorney’s Office will be defending Ken Dillon’s FOIA claim, certainly Ken Kohl himself could confirm the central relevance of the contemporaneous notes from Dr. Bruce Ivins’ laboratory notebooks — and confirm that all the Lab Notebooks should be returned to USAMRIID (as requested) for processing and uploading.
DXer said
In a June 19, 2015 FOIA appeal involving a FOIA request for documents from September and October 2001, showing what Dr. Ivins was doing in the lab, Dillon writes:
“Lastly, records relating to Ivins’s animal experiments, including with 52 rabbits, in September and October, 2001 show his activities and whereabouts and so should be released. ”
There are good reasons to think that FBI, knowing that the anthrax had been mailed by an al Qaeda operative, falsely accused Bruce Ivins after his suicide of having mailed the anthrax letters. Former head of the Amerithrax investigation Richard Lambert, an authoritative source, has stated that FBI suppressed a great deal of exculpatory evidence regarding Ivins. Thus the American people have an undeniable and compelling interest in learning what all FBI records responsive to this request contain.
Thank you for your consideration of this appeal.”
The FBI nowhere mentioned rabbits in the Amerithrax Investigative Summary. Similarly, in its FOIA production, it nowhere produced the documents relating to the experiment with the 52 rabbits. It involved formaldehyde and was why Dr. Ivins came to the lab those nights and weekends.” The AUSAs and investigators quite literally stuffed 52 rabbits down into a hat out of sight.
DXer said
WHITE RABBITS LYRICS
“They Done Wrong / We Done Wrong”
As they done wrong
And we done wrong
Now what makes you so certain all their finger pointing’s done
As they don’t know
What they been told
They say it best
They’re already there
And its not
The way it seems at all
So come on now
Now shake things down tell me how everyone’s gone way to soft
Cos they don’t know
What it might take
They say it best
They’re already there
And its not
The way it seems at all
Everybody stay where you are
Cos they don’t know
What they’ve been told
They say it best
I’m already there
And its not what I thought it would amount to
They ain’t calling us now
Now let’s just make a time of it
Why you shouldn’t tell me now how everyone’s gone way to soft
Cos they don’t know
What they’ve been told
They say it best
They’re already there
And its not the end of the line for you
I’m already there
When it stops
Like it’s supposed to
I’ll be coming around
Enough’s enough
I just want to get down to it
No no no
DXer said
FoxNews will want to tweak its headline to refer to FBI official or “former lead Amerithrax investigator” — “Former FBI director” would refer to FBI Director Mueller — who is not expected to address the 52 rabbits that Ken and Rachel stuffed down into a hat anytime soon.
Former FBI director alleges agency concealing evidence in anthrax casehttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/16/former-fbi-director-alleges-agency-concealing-evidence-in-anthrax-case/
Published April 16, 2015
FoxNews.com
An ex-director of the FBI’s anthrax investigation says the agency is hiding evidence that casts doubt on its conclusion that Army scientist Bruce Ivins sent the anthrax-filled letters that killed five people and sickened 17 others in 2001.
Richard Lambert made the claims in a civil lawsuit filed April 2 in U.S. District Court in Knoxville, Tennessee. Lambert said Wednesday that the Privacy Act will likely prevent the information’s release unless Congress decides to investigate.
Christopher Allen, an FBI spokesman, said the agency usually does not comment on pending litigation. In December, responding to a General Accountability Office report that anthrax investigators used flawed scientific methods, Allen said the FBI’s conclusions were based on “the full evidence before us.”
Ivins killed himself in Frederick, Maryland in 2008, as prosecutors prepared to charge him with murder. Jeffrey Taylor, then U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, told a news conference eight days prior that “based on the evidence we had collected, we could prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Lambert says in his lawsuit that while Ivins might have been the mailer, the circumstantial case against him would not have been enough to convict him. Lambert claims there is a “wealth” of contrary evidence, “which the FBI continues to conceal from Congress and the American people.”
Anthrax investigators, under Lambert’s early direction, focused on another Army scientist, Steven Hatfill, who was eventually cleared. Hatfill received $5.8 million to settle his violation-of-privacy lawsuit against the Department of Justice.
Lambert headed the investigation from 2002 to 2006, when he transferred to Knoxville to run the FBI office there until his retirement in 2012. His lawsuit contends the Justice Department illegally caused him to be fired from a subsequent security job at the Energy Department’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory because he had filed a whistleblower report in 2006 alleging mismanagement of the anthrax probe.
The alleged mismanagement included “the FBI’s fingering of Bruce Ivins as the anthrax mailer” and “the FBI’s subsequent efforts to railroad the prosecution of Ivins in the face of daunting exculpatory evidence,” Lambert says in his lawsuit.
Lambert says his whistleblower complaints also included understaffing of the investigation; inexperienced team members; restrictions on information sharing; and the FBI laboratory’s deliberate concealment from the team of its discovery of human DNA on an anthrax-filled envelope addressed to U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy.
The Associated Press contributed to this report
DXer said
Dr. Jerry Jaax was interviewed in the Frederick News-Post about rabbits and protocols. Dr. Jaax does not believe Ivins was the mailer of the Fall 2001 anthrax letters.
One commenter to a different article reports:
“After the January [2014] meeting, Col. Jerry Jaax, KSU University Veterinarian, came up to me and said “You must be DevilsAdvocate.” I affirmed his guess (based upon my statements to the committee?). Jaax stated “Dr. Ivins was NOT THE ANTHRAX MAILER.” Having worked with Ivins his entire career, I suppose Jaax might be right & the FBI wrong?”
The investigative reporting that has not yet been done by a newspaper journalist would involve going to the documents showing Dr. Ivins work with the 52 rabbits during the nights and weekends that Vahid Majidi mistakenly claimed that Bruce Ivins had no reason to go to the lab. Some experienced journalists have been deterred because there was more than one rabbit experiment that Fall — and so due to the massive number of documents withheld in 2009 -2013 — it made it difficult to sew the narrative of events together.
The protocols and contemporaneous documents finally produced over the years detail his work on those nights and weekends in September and October 2001 with the 52 rabbits in the B3. AUSA Lieber and Vahid Majidi apparently weren’t even aware of the experiment with the rabbits. See Amerithrax Investigative Summary, Lieber’s filmed interview and Majidi’s e-book. It is not to their credit that they never rolled up their sleeves and studied the documents after they were obtained and uploaded.
As to the recent feature in Frederick News-Post about the care and feeding of rabbits, everyone already knew that rabbits prefer Trix. Please be sure not to cut-and-paste the entire article as Frederick News-Post owner wants to be sure to protect the copyright of the good work that the paper has been doing over the years on Amerithrax, or at least the annual mishap reports officially filed by USAMRIID.
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/news/science_and_technology/research/animals-play-fatal-role-at-detrick-labs/article_c2dff9ff-8abf-5746-a788-c9849de6b2fa.html
“Animals play fatal role at Detrick labs”
Excerpt:
“The suggested corrective actions included retraining the employee and discussing a “plan of action” for the rabbit.
In a USAMRIID report from July 2, 2013, an employee reported being bitten by a rabbit while feeding it Froot Loops
***
The paper notes that the research followed federal guidelines for the care and use of lab animals, and made all efforts to minimize the animals’ suffering.
Dr. Jerry Jaax was chief of the veterinary medicine division at USAMRIID and worked there from 1979 to 1998. He spent 26 years in the Army Veterinary Corps but now works at Kansas State University as associate vice president for research compliance.
“One of the cardinal principles is that you don’t use animals unless it’s absolutely necessary,” Jaax said.
All research using animals at USAMRIID must gain approval from its Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, according to Vander-Linden.
Researchers must justify why their project requires animals, and how they will mitigate any distress and pain their experiments might cause.
“The animals don’t really have much of a say in it, and you really have to be an advocate for their welfare,” Jaax said.
Jaax himself is no stranger to lab mishaps. In 1984, he was part of a team working with monkeys at USAMRIID. The conditions of their study on tear duct function did not allow them to anesthetize the animals, and he had to catch the monkeys to put drops into their eyes.
“The monkeys didn’t like to do that any more than your 4-year-old might,” he said. “We couldn’t do it with heavy gloves on, and one of them bit me.”
He said he still has a scar on his finger from the bite.
***
Lab animals are not supposed to leave Fort Detrick alive.
“Rodents and lagomorphs will enter the (agency’s) facilities uninfected and never will be brought out of it,” each report states.”
Some general background:
1. FBI interview statement: If someone came in off hours it was to work on the animal experiments – this could take approximately two hours and was usually a one-person job.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/fbi-interview-statement-if-someone-came-in-off-hours-it-was-to-work-on-the-animal-experiments-this-could-take-approximately-two-hours-and-was-usually-a-one-person-job/
2. Protocol B01-11 Produced Last Week Specified The “Pain Assessment Guidelines” Bruce Ivins Was Required To Follow In Monitoring The 52 Rabbits In The B3 That First Week Of October 2001
Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 27, 2013
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/protocol-b01-11-produced-last-week-specified-the-pain-assessment-guidelines-bruce-ivins-was-required-to-follow-in-monitoring-the-52-rabbits-in-the-b3-that-first-week-of-october-2001/
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
Graeme McQuwwn writes at page 97 in “2001 Anthrax Deception” (Clarity 2014):
“Meanwhile, other disturbing evidence continued to accumulate. For example, the FBI had claimed that Ivins could not account for extra hours in the lab in the evenings and weekends prior to the anthrax mailings. He was, they claimed, using this time to prepare the anthrax for the attacks. Such extra time in the lab at night was, they added, unprecedented in his work history.91 But investigators for PBS Frontline, ProPublica and McClatchy Newspapers found that Ivins was doing valid and important work at the lab during the times in question. They also found that the number of night hours in the lab that had been called anomalous by the FBI were not so unusual—he had put in many extra hours in labs in the USAMRIID complex other than the lab to which the FBI had apparently, without reason, restricted its attention.92”
Actually, although the point made about Ivins hours in 1425 vs. 1412 is a very importnat one — and one GAO might really run with , McClatchy, according to Greg Gordon, found the information about rabbits in 1425 confusing.
There were various different experiments that were hard to distinguish. McClatchy, ProPublica and Frontline had a relative young person making FOIA requests. Had they had years to devote and had they resorted to a marriage proposal to the adorable FOIA officer Sandra — as I did — they might have had more success.
But they were working on on a tight time frame and I OTOH wooed the wonderful and fair-minded FOIA officer over many months and even years.
http:;//www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
http://vault.fbi.gov/Amerithrax/amerithrax-part-56-of/view
IVINS did a lot of work for other researchers, a
not find his time in the suites to be unusual.__________
pointed out that their work requires them to work around the
organisms, not around the clock, elaborating that animals and
other living things have their own start and stop time that does
not fit within the work day. IVINS was helping a lot of people
‘at the time and growing a lot of spores for other researchers
have been working on a starter pre or sub-culture, but
could not be more specific because does not know what
was working _______ stated IVINS was more active in
his research and carrying a more hectic schedule in 2001, and
that he has more help’now than he did at that time.
p. 7 of 18
Note: Dr. Ivins’ assistant was assigned to help another division at the start of September 2001.
DXer said
Please go to this blog for a lengthy and thoughtful discussion of Dr. Ivins and the 52 rabbits.
GAO Report on Amerithrax Case and Bruce Ivins
August 23, 2014
http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2014/08/23/gao-report-on-amerithrax-case-and-bruce-ivins-2-2/
Old Atlantic, in addition, note that Dr. Ivins did not have the documents. The FBI took the key notebooks. USAMRIID, years after Ivins’ death, had to retrieve it from the FBI. A key one relating to the rabbits was Pat Fellows’ notebook. She is the one who the dogs alerted to and so may have felt under a lot of pressure. Lab tech AB threw out the cage cards. On the particulars of the rabbit evidence, the posts below are a better source on specifics than my general recall.
His defense counsel was not allowed to speak to his colleagues.
The FBI didn’t even check his alibi that he was at the group therapy meeting on 9/17 until after his suicide. So it is not surprising that did not dig deep and get the rabbit documents. Then it was strictly CYA mode. You can see from the Investigative Summary that the FBI did not even know about the rabbit experiment the first week of October 2001 — and knew only of the mice experiment in late September 2001.
A review of his emails, though, would have turned up summaries that established that the experiment was that first week in October 2001 — and so AUSA Lieber’s characterizations, in my opinion, were totally unfounded. I emailed her for help in getting the rabbit documents and she responded by email I would never get another document under FOIA. (That is why I needed to do an end-run around DOJ/FBI and go to USAMRIID).
In his filmed presentation at the UCLA conference in DC that Lew moderated, the able defense counsel, whose name escapes me, says that Dr. Ivins position was always that he had reason to be in the lab.
Mara, Dr. Ivins’ assistant, explained that checking the animals was a one person job and would take a couple of hours — which is what was recorded.
As for me, I can’t remember what I had dinner last night, let alone what I did last week or a half decade ago — especially on a particular week. I need the contemporaneous documents to reconstruct things.*
I will read your blog post more closely later today or tomorrow morning.
Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US BIodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
*
Of course, even my pet cats would confirm I farted in bed when no one was within earshot. But their abilities have not been scientifically validated so I’m in the clear.
DXer said
The blogger OldAtlantic writes:
“GAO should find out if the government knew of the experiments at the time of his death and subsequently.”
As for “subsequently,” the government, at a minimum, knew of all the documents linked above by Lew. The purpose of uploading them was to get people on the same page.
But let’s turn to November 2007. The name of the FBI Special Agent who reviewed some documents on Ivins formaldehyde study is provided here (if you turn to the unredacted version).
Click to access 847447.pdf
The review was conducted on November 14, 2007.
The documents were contained in evidence item 1B4377.
At large DC law firm, the key document for document analysis in such a case would be a chronology of how Dr. Ivins spent his time September 11 – October 9, 2001. It would incorporate all manner of information that could be gleaned from contemporaneous documents and computer records. That sort of analysis should have been critical to the FBI’s analysis and is totally missing from the documents disclosed in Amerithrax.
The FBI hadn’t even bothered to confirm that he was at his group therapy session the night they say he mailed the letters! (The FBI views the mailing period as between 5 p.m. September 17 and 8 p.m. September 18. He was at work on September 18 and tending to local business in Frederick on the 18th and so couldn’t have done it then. The previous evening he was at his group therapy session.
Amerithrax is really as simple as that.
DXer said
These are Dr. Ivins’ notes on the subject of his alibi. He and his counsel’s position was that he DID have an alibi. The counsel is available to interview.
It is the FBI’s characterization that he didn’t. And note that the notes made by an agent in a 302 are the agent’s notes — it is not the statement of the person being questioned. That is why critics have long urged that FBI interviews be recorded.
http://vault.fbi.gov/Amerithrax/Amerithrax%20Part%2029%20of%2059
Notebooks 3716 and 4383 1 SEP through 15 OCT -Mouse passive immunization
1 SEP through 15 OCT
Notebook 4240 and computerfiles! – Preparation of vaccine for FDA immunization of mice -September and October
Notebook 4241 and computer les and other papers! – “New” formaldehyde
experiment -September into November
Old Atlantic is mistaken is saying that the FBI was not told about the experiment. The DOJ simply chose to characterize a broad statement in an interview by Patricia Fellows, to whom the bloodhounds had alerted, rather than the statement of Mara Linscott. Instead of relying on either, the FBI should have delved into the associated documentary evidence from six years earlier, including the pertinent protocols.
DXer said
Other documents, including emails and email attachments, confirm the date of preparation of spores on October 1, and the sub cu challenge on October 2, 2001.
Three notebooks from the FBI have now been released on the FOIA website
Posted by Lew Weinstein on September 4, 2012
UPDATE
heads up – Notebook 4241 is a blockbuster
– recounting his work on the rabbits – first week of October
… the formaldehyde experiment
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/three-notebooks-from-the-fbi-have-now-been-released-on-the-foia-website/
Many of the entries were dated October 4, 2001.
Click to access 20000216_LabNotebook%204241_B01-11(redacted).pdf
One was dated October 5.
In regard to this October 5, 2001 lab notebook entry, GAO should publish its interview of AUSA Lieber in which she explains when she thinks the numbers referred to on the next page were created and why she didn’t mention the 52 rabbits in her Investigative Summary — why she claimed he had no reason to be in that lab at night that week.
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/in-regard-to-this-october-5-2001-lab-notebook-entry-gao-should-publish-its-interview-of-ausa-lieber-in-which-she-explains-when-she-thinks-the-numbers-referred-to-on-the-next-page-were-created-and/
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 16, 2012
from DXer … October 5, 2001 email explaining reason for Ivins’ time in the B3 at the late hours … withheld by USAMRIID until after the FBI report was issued and the initial press reaction was published
Posted by Lew Weinstein on March 1, 2010
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/from-dxer-10501-email-from-dr-ivins-explaining-how-he-was-spending-his-time-in-b3-on-the-nights-the-doj-says-he-was-aerosolizing-anthrax/
DXer said
Here is the October 5, 2001 email reporting on October 2, 2001 challenge confirms it was by injection (not aerosol) and that 12 rabbits had died in 3 days since injection
Posted by Lew Weinstein on March 15, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/03/15/october-5-2001-email-reporting-on-october-2-2001-challenge-confirms-it-was-by-injection-not-aerosol-and-that-12-rabbits-had-died-in-3-days-since-injection/
Where is page 3 and page 4 of Lab Notebook 4241?
DXer said
Dr. Ivins at one point was told that it was not possible to retrieve his emails older than a couple years. But the FBI had them.
GAO, who at DOJ/FBI reviewed Ivins’ emails and the attachments? My best friend and roommate’s paralegal was the paralegal for Amerithrax. (I spent 15 years in Arlington, VA). Ask the original paralegal for his numbered and abstracted database. If you would, search the keyword “dropped ball”.
Given what was happening in her office — and the forced departure of the supervisor giving out assignments — it is understandable that AUSA Lieber may have been distracted from reviewing the documents. At the same time, numerous FBI scientists and investigators can confirm the tremendous pressure folks were under to solve Amerithrax.
The DOJ prosecutors and FBI investigators do top flight work and are of high caliber. But that doesn’t change the fact that the documents contradict the FBI’s conclusion in Amerithrax.
Part of being top flight is correcting mistakes and addressing the merits — rather than just reasserting the conclusion. See AUSA Lieber’s public television interview even after she had been put on notice of these documents.
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION: 10 days after the rabbits had been challenged on October 1, 2001, Dr. Ivins presented preliminary results from the Battelle study involving the 5 year old preps of rPA vaccine w/ and w/o formaldehyde.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 24, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/not-for-public-distribution-10-days-after-the-rabbits-had-been-challenged-on-october-1-2001-dr-ivins-presented-preliminary-results-from-the-battelle-study-involving-the-5-year-old-preps-of-rpa-v/
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 Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/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/
Under The Mouse Protocol (As Under The Rabbit Protocol), Dr. Ivins Was Tasked With Taking Part In Immunization, Bleeding, Challenge And Observation Of The Animals
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/under-the-mouse-protocol-as-under-the-rabbit-protocol-dr-ivins-was-tasked-with-taking-part-in-immunization-bleeding-challenge-and-observation-of-the-animals/
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 Lew Weinstein on January 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/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/
oldatlantic said
I double posted by error. Unfortunately, I deleted the above link instead of the other one. Please use this link:
http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2014/08/23/gao-report-on-amerithrax-case-and-bruce-ivins-2/
Great work by Dxer and Lew Weinstein to keep after this case. It is of great importance to restore the integrity of the FBI and DOJ. This is of critical value with Russia on the march and it is likely involved with others from time to time.
DXer said
Speaking of Russia, I noticed that in the November 2007 search, the FBI found a passport application to visit Russia that anticipated travel date of 7/13/2001.
“A passport application for a nine day trip to Russia, anticipated travel date of 07/13/2001”
vault.fbi.gov/Amerithrax/Amerithrax%20Part%20%2013%20of%2059
This document contains neither recommendations nor conclusions of the FBI. It is the …… keys in a government car, and …… A passport application for a nine day trip to Russia, anticipated travel date of 07/13/2001;.
DXer said
On July 25, 2001, Dr. Ivins wrote:
“I’m on vacation for a week, until August 1.”
Some July and August 2001 emails are in Batch 31 and Batch 32:
http://mrmc.amedd.army.mil/index.cfm?pageid=foia_reading_room.overview#
Where did Bruce go on vacation the last week of July 2001? Did he go to Russia as suggested he planned to do by the passport application seized in the November 2007 search of his office? Did he go with his brother Charles? They had started going on annual vacations. Charles was a retired pharmacist.
Charles Ivins Says Brother’s Suicide ‘Blindsided’ Him : NPR
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93478094
Aug 10, 2008 … Charles Ivins, the brother of an Army scientist who killed himself last month … Army scientist Bruce Ivins, took deadly anthrax from the lab where he … About 10 years ago, Charles and Bruce started going on annual vacations.
FWIW, both Ken Alibek and Serge Popov, former Russian anthrax researchers, told me that Russia had virulent Ames. Serge said whenever you wanted to use it in research you just ordered it. Experts such as WIlliam Patrick had concluded that there was a spy at Ft. Detrick.
Leading DARPA-funded Ames researcher Ken Alibek shared a suite with Ali Al-TImimi, who was known to meet with fellow Falls Church imam 911 Anwar Awlaki.
With 330, including 30 unidentified, having access to Ames at just ONE of the two buildings (according to a 2006 Washington Field Office memo) — and that is only after the keypad was installed in August 1998 –it would be very difficult to identify that spy. The FBI do not have an easy job.
DXer said
If you consider the number of ricin cases successfully resolved, you begin to appreciate that traditional forensic methods — and old-fashioned document review — is very likely going to be the probative methods in any future bioattacks. Some people still have not read and do not understand these documents relating to the 52 rabbits. Not a dime should be spent for -omics until FBI scientists first do their assigned summer reading.
DXer said
Dr. Ivins estimated that 15 days of after hours observation would take 30 hours, which is 2 hours a day.
His formal estimate is provided as an attachment to the email dated July 11, 2006.
Other tasks on given days would take 8 hours. And spore production would take 70 hours.
US Attorney Taylor announced Amerithrax was solved based on a claim that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab after hours. It was a hugely ignorant claim that was contradicted by the documents in the possession of the DOJ/FBI.
Amerithrax represents the greatest counterintelligence failure in the history of the United States.
AUSA Lieber and lead investigator Edward Montooth and WMD Vahid Majidi have demonstrated no mastery of the documents relating to the experiment with the 52 rabbits.
Mistakes in the rush of events could be excused. Their failure to correct their mistakes cannot.
AUSA Lieber should have gone to the documents produced under FOIA and come to understand the experiment with the 52 rabbits and the after hours observations.
WMD Vahid Majidi in writing his e-book should also.
It’s never to late to get things right and correst missteps — until it is.
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
FW: Vaccine project, next steps Tuesday, July 11, 2006 12:40:58 PM
; Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
I’ve looked over the animal protocol and I have some comments about it. First of all, though, I have a budget of DIRECT costs. (No indirect costs or
overhead costs figured into this.)
Swiss Webster mouse cost = $3.70 per mouse Housing costs –
– $3.75 per pan per day Housing costs – – $4.83 per pan per day
62 mice X $3.70 = 7 pans X 37 days X $3.75 = 7 pans X 15 days X $4.83 =
$229.40 $971.25 $507.15
$400.00 $400.00
(b)(2)
(b)(2)
Animal Labor (Technician and PI – $50.00 per hour) Day
1 – injection, bleed, processing
Day 15 – injection, bleed, processing
Day 30 – challenge,bleed, processing, plate counts Day 32 – bleed, processing
15 days of after-hours animal observations
Spore Production labor 70 hours X $50.00 per hour =
Data Collection and collation labor 20 hours X $50.00 per hour =
8 hours X $50.00 = 8 hours X $50.00 =
8 hours X $50.00 = $400.00 4 hours X $50.00 = $200.00
30 hours X $50.00 = $1,500.00
DXer said
Here is a representative email written about 9 PM on a Sunday night about a rabbit challenge. He says “I’m headed in there in a few minutes (about 9 pm Sunday night), and I’ll see if any more are down. I’ll do a blood culture on dead rabbits.
I expect JAG is going to provide the rabbit bacteremia data that was attached to an email in the September/October 2001 timeframe.
Click to access 20040105_batch54(redacted).pdf
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: Naimbia A0188 Challenge Sunday, January 25, 2004 8:46:19 PM
(b) (6)
Thank you. This information will now be classified Top Secret/Nuclear-crypto. As soon as I send this email, I will deprogram my head with half a bottle of Irish Whiskey. That should do it….
Seriously, very interesting! I’m headed in there in a few minutes (about 9 pm, Sunday night), and I’ll see if any more are down. I’ll do blood cultures on any dead rabbits.
– Bruce
> —–Original Message—–
>From:
>Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2004 1:43 PM
>To:
>Subject: Naimbia A0188 Challenge > >Controls: 10/10 died
>Vaccinated Rabbits: 1/10 rabbits (E-8 died O/N). Three other animals look ill. 4 animals were bacteremic. >
(6)
DXer said
Here is another representative email describing his late night work on a Sunday in connection with a rabbit challenge.
He identifies which are “gone”, he plates their blood out, he makes sure that they have feed in their container. etc.
Click to access 20040105_batch54(redacted).pdf
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: Rabbits – China AO591 Challenge after 2.5 days Saturday, February 21, 2004 11:44:59 PM
(b) (6)
(b)
See below. Here is my update as of 2.5 days after challenge. Rabbits 17 and 20 were gone. I (p6l)ated their blood out, and it’s in ncubator. Rabbits 11 and 12 looked sick, but rabbit 13 looked OK. The others looked OK. I don’t think this strain/isolate is as nasty as the previous one that was sprayed (that killed all controls within 48 hours and killed 3 immunized rabbits).
There was no rabbit chow in some of the feeders, and there was no feed in the feed container. When I left the room I got some from Vet Med and put it into the clean changeroom, along with a note to the animal caretaker to take it into the suite and rabbit room.
I’ll be in Sunday at 10 pm to do the 3.5 day check on the rabbits.
– Bruce *********************************************************************
Here is what we have so far, at 10 pm, Saturday, 21 FEB 04, 2 .5 days after challenge:
(b)(6)
(b)(2)
Vaccinated:
F1 – OK F2 – OK F3 – OK F4 – OK F5 – OK F6 – OK F7 – OK F8 – OK F9 – OK F10 – OK
Controls:
F11 – Sick F12 – Sick F13 – OK F14 – Dead F15 – Dead F16 – Dead F17 – Dead F18 – Dead F19 – Dead F20 – Dead
Summary as of 2 .5 days: Vaccinated – 0/10 dead Controls – 7 /10 dead
DXer said
The blood cultures were from cardiac punctures.
From: Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:54 AM
To: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Subject: RE: Rabbits – China AO591 Challenge
(b) (6)
Here is my update from yours last night. Started at 0750 hrs 21 FEB 04.
Vaccinated: Rabbits 7, 8, 9 and 10 look ill and are not eating well, the rest OK
Controls: Rabbits 15 and 16 died overnight. Unfortunately the rabbits were already in the cold room by the time I arrived (the care taker took the rabbit out of the room about 15 minutes before I arrived…….are they suppose to do that???) All the rest look real sick, doubt if they will make it by the end of the day. Just sitting there saying “I feel like crap, what the hell did you do to me?….”
Blood cultures from rabbits 14, 18 and 19 cardiac punctures you did last night all had numerous colonies (plates are stored in the fridge and I’ll ice them away on Monday.
Plated out 48 hr blood cultures from all the vaccinated rabbits and one control (still alive #20). Thanks for all your help.
DXer said
Here is another representative email sent on late Sunday night, in connection with an animal experiment. (This one follows his email on Saturday, the day prior).
AUSA Lieber and investigator Montooth provably knew about the rabbit experiment (if we assume they take a hands on approach and read the investigative documents).
But I will leave it to them to explain why Dr. Ivins had no reason to come in that weekend the first week of October 2001.
The claim he had no reason to come into the lab was spurious and central to the USG’s “Ivins Theory.”
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: Rabbits – China AO591 Challenge after 3.5 days Sunday, February 22, 2004 9:32:45 PM
(b) (6)
—–Original Message—–
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 11:45 PM
To: Subject: RE: Rabbits – China AO591 Challenge after 2.5 days
See below. Here is my update as of 3.5 days after challenge.
(6)
All the vaccinated monkeys look fine.
Again, with the huge spray dose that the rabbits got, the fact that some of them didn’t die until
after 2.5 days suggests that this strain may not be as virulent as the two which killed 2 and 3 vaccinated rabbits respectively. I think that we should think about taking some of the passaged bugs from those two strains, growing them up and redoing the rabbit spray. Another suggestion, one that would require very little effort from and me – let’s grow up on blood and capsule agar the two virulent parents as well as what came out of the immunized rabbits and see if there are any obvious differences in morphology. It’s possible that what came out of the rabbit may have been exceptionally encapsulated or fast-growing.
– Bruce
*********************************************************************
Here is what we have so far, at 9 pm, S unday, 22 FEB 04, 3.5 days after challenge:
Vaccinated:
F1 – OK F2 – OK F3 – OK F4 – OK F5 – OK F6 – OK F7 – OK F8 – OK F9 – OK F10 – OK
Controls:
F11 – Dead F12 – Dead F13 – Dead F14 – Dead F15 – Dead F16 – Dead F17 – Dead F18 – Dead
(b) (6)
(b)
(b) (6)
F19 – Dead F20 – Dead
Summary as of 2 .5 days: Vaccinated – 0/10 dead Controls – 10 /10 dead
DXer said
He would also come in late at night during the week — in connection with such plate counts.
No late nights by a person working alone were recorded beginning in January 2002 because of the implementation of a two-person rule, which then was abandoned.
The prosecutors and investigators appear not to have understood this based on the statistical analysis they presented as justification for closing Amerithrax.
From: To:
Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Request for exception to policy Wednesday, January 14, 2004 3:23:08 PM
(b) (6)
I would like to request an exception to the policy for removal of bacterial strains from the hot suite (to another hot suite) requiring two individuals at the t4ransfer point. This evening, about 10 pm, I will be coming in to count plates of B. anthracis. After determining concentration, I will dilute the suspension to the appropriate concentration for aerosolization. I would like to put it into a transport box in the
airlock, put security tape on the box (to prevent unauthorized opening), leave the box in the airlock, shower out, then take the box to for an early spray tomorrow morning.
I realize that the usual procedure is to have someone take the material from the airlock immediately after it is put into the airlock, but I believe that at 10 pm, there should be no worry that an unauthorized individual will get hold of the material before I get out of the shower and pick it up. (Anyone, including myself, going into the airlock will be identified.)
Please let me know about the acceptability of my request. Thank you. Bruce Ivins
DXer said
The same nighttime animal checks from January/February 2004 — after the two person rule was abandoned — continued. For example, here he is in late September 2004 reporting on the rabbits at 10 PM.
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Rabbit deaths Thursday, September 30, 2004 10:00:00 PM
(b) (6)
Rabbit deaths on Thursday (day 2), 30 SEP: K11 – am
K12 – am
K13 – pm Bloods were drawn for the three rabbits and plated onto SBA.
Two more control rabbits remain. None of the vaccinated animals appear sick.
Bruce Ivins
DXer said
And here Dr. Ivins is in the lab earlier that week on Saturday at 9:51 PM. A spray, this was done in Building 1412. The prosecutor and investigators appear not to have understood the issue of hours — or if they did, their analysis was highly manipulative. Dr. Andrews explains the issue in his civil deposition that is now uploaded.
Click to access 20040907_batch58(redacted).pdf
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: Saturday, September 25, 2004 9:51:00 PM
(b) (6)
I can’t make any meeting before 11 OCT. I’m involved in a spray this week and also a spore harvest. I’m on vacation from 1 OCT until 11 OCT.
– Bruce Bruce Ivins
DXer said
Checks at about 10 PM at night rather than during the day continued to be the norm for Dr. Ivins rather than the exception. Animal techs were available to check the animals during the day.
The FBI’s and prosecutor’s claim he had no reason to be in the lab those nights had no factual basis in the contemporaneous documents.
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 9:55 PM
To: Cc: Subject: Mice
Hi,
I checked your mice tonight. The 0.1 mg, 1.0 mg and 10 mg groups are almost all dead. The NS group is doing fine. Whoever is checking the mice whoever that is) is not entering the data on the sheet, and has missed one of the animals in one o)f tbhe groups. There were nine dead in the 10 mg group. I had 7 tonight, and isted 1 dead, so th(6at) means one was missed in today’s count. (Or you only started with 9 in the gr(o6u)p.) I think the value)s (for dead mice are:
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b(
(b)
10 mg – 9 dead 1 mg – 8 dead 0.1 mg – 10 dead NS – 0 dead
6 )
Bruce Ivins
DXer said
Sometimes he made animal checks at 8:30 PM at night — sometimes at 10 PM. For the prosecutor and investigators to base the closing of such a national security investigation on the grounds that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab at night — and not to know that there were 52 rabbits in that B3 — was very seriously negligent.
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
RE: Mice Sunday, August 21, 2005 8:30:17 PM
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
As of Sunday night, 21 August, here is what we have:
10 mg – 9 dead 1 mg – 10 dead 0.1 mg – 10 dead NS – 8 dead
I wonder if there’s a problem with the strain of mice (A/J) and the monoclonal antibodies. I think used Balb/C or CBA/J mice for her studies with passive protection against Vollum 1B challenge. (6)
Bruce Ivins
________________________________
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 9:53 PM To: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID; Cc: Subject: RE: Mice
As of Saturday night, 20 August, here is what we have:
10 mg – 9 dead 1 mg – 10 dead 0.1 mg – 10 dead NS – 6 dead
Bruce Ivins
DXer said
For someone to argue that it was unusual for Dr. Ivins to be in late on a Saturday and Sunday night — dramatic evidence of five murders in an important national security investigation — it seems that did not even looked at Dr. Ivins’ emails.
Now if DOJ prosecutors and FBI investigators kept contemporaneous records iike Dr. Ivins, we could trace the negligence to see who dropped the ball precisely when. Let’s look at the emails of the investigators and prosecutors.
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: TTD and LD50 determinations – Survival data- SA12469 – April 24, 2007 (UNCLASSIFIED) Sunday, April 29, 2007 8:58:29 PM
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: TTD and LD50 determinations – Survival data- SA12469 – April 24, 2007 (UNCLASSIFIED) Saturday, April 28, 2007 10:27:23 PM
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: TTD and LD50 determinations – Survival data- SA12469 – April 24, 2007 (UNCLASSIFIED) Friday, April 27, 2007 9:37:35 PM
DXer said
The witness testimony (see Linscott 302) and Dr. Ivins’ budget documents explained it would take 1 /12 – 2 hours to make a nighttime animal check. It is disturbing that the prosecutors seemed unaware of the documents showing that such checks were made by Ivins late at night rather than during the day. Such checks also commonly included plating. With checks 2X’s a day, the second observation (as Ivins explains in one email) could be made in the afternoon or at night. The animal technician would be the one to make the animal observation in the morning. Over the years the reports by Ivins on his animal observations — such as those posted in this thread — invariably were late at night.
The FBI’s statistical analysis did not take into account implementation of the short-lived two-person rule in January 2002. So when the FBI saw the after hours stop abruptly, they mistakenly inferred Dr. Ivins’ guilt. The FBI then centered its cotton candy “Ivins Theory” around after hours work that they falsely claimed was unexplained. This was a pretty basic mistake for them to make on such an important national security investigation. It might have been avoided if Dr. Ivins’ colleagues had been allowed by the Army to speak with Dr. Ivins’ attorney.
People asserting he had no reason to be in the lab seem not to have read the relevant emails and documents relating to the rabbit experiment in October 2001. As for the mice experiment in late September 2001, they unreasonably do not credit that it would take 1 1/2 – 2 hours to make the check. And when the documents are uploaded and brought to their attention, they ignore them and do not discuss them. See Majidi 2013 e-book. When I emailed AUSA Lieber and asked her help in obtaining the rabbit documents so that people might get on the same page, she said I would never get another document under FOIA. Well, she was right that DOJ Criminal FOIA shut me out. But I in fact succeeded in getting quite a few documents relating to the rabbit experiment. It was her job to have gotten them in 2007 and 2008.
The after hours work with the animal experiments fully explains Dr. Ivins’ after hours time. The FBI’s entire “Ivins Theory” was based on a total crock.
In the rush of events in July 2008,AUSA Lieber may not have had time to review Dr. Ivins’ emails. It was a busy month. Dr. Ivins’ first counselor — the one who says in her 2009 book she got her instructions each night from an alien in 2000 and 2001 — reported that Dr. Ivins was a murderous fiend. (She says she thought murderous astral entities were attached to all of her clients in her new part-time addictions counseling gig). She talked to rocks and they talked back to her. After 911, she says she was pursued by the astral entities at night and would travel to Afghanistan and WTC 1993, narrowly escaping by passing through a vortex. She says she was protected from a diagnosis of being psychotic by her husband who was in military personnel. This witness is what AUSA Lieber and Dr. Saathoff relied upon rather than turning to the contemporary documentary evidence. This is the witness the prosecutor and investigators relied upon when they tested Ivins again for DNA to compare it to the semen-stained panties taken from his garbage — and told Ivins that they were going to call his family in front of the grand jury to explain his late hours at the lab. Instead of pressurizing the man that they knew had already attempted suicide, they should have taken pains to master the documents relating to the mice and rabbit experiments in late September 2001 and early October 2001.
When they had more time for review, AUSA Lieber and WMD head Majidi never corrected their missteps and never addressed the documents.
Maybe document analysis is not the ordinary work of the usual Postal Inspector or an FBI agent more accustomed to undercover street drug buys. But it was not excusable at the time of the official February 2010 closing of the case or AUSA Lieber’s Frontline interview. Similarly, it was definitely not excusable at the time of Vahid Majidi’s 2013 e-book. It is simply unacceptable that by the time of his 2013 e-book he had not studied the documents relating to the experiment with the 52 rabbits.
If people are not willing to delve into the contemporaneous documents and make evidence-based assertions, they should STFU.
Here is an example of a 2007 email at 9:35 PM:
From: To:
Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
RE: Mouse LD50 from 23 JAN 07 -Deaths as of Day 3
Friday, January 26, 2007 10:08:58 PM
(b) (6)
________________________________
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:35 PM
To: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
Subject: RE: Mouse LD50 from 23 JAN 07
-Deaths as of Day 2 Here are the death data as of Day 3 from the Jan 23 07 mouse LD50:
(b) (6)
1000 spores 352 spores 100 spores 36.4 spores 13.6 spores
Bruce Ivins
10 dead 8 dead 6 dead 3 dead 1 dead
DXer said
Dr. Ivins in October 2001 spent the greatest amount of time right when the most rabbits would have been dying. Here, on Day 4 after the challenge, he reports on Saturday at 3:33 PM.
For AUSA Lieber to claim in her Amerithrax Investigative Summary that Dr. Ivins had no reason — no reason at all, she says — to be in the lab that weekend in October 2001 — is grossly negligent. Everyone makes mistakes. Only some people don’t correct them and then goes on national television to renew and underscore the false factual assertions.
From: To:
Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
RE: Mouse LD50 from 23 JAN 07 -Deaths as of Day 4 Saturday, January 27, 2007 3:33:24 PM
(b) (6)
________________________________
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:35 PM To: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
Subject: RE: Mouse LD50 from 23 JAN 07 -Deaths as of Day 2 Here are the death data as of Day 4 from the Jan 23 07 mouse LD50:
(b) (6)
1000 spores 352 spores 100 spores 36.4 spores 13.6 spores
10 dead 9 dead 7 dead 3 dead 1 dead
It appears that mouse injections (rather than guinea pig injections) may be more useful in determining strain virulence. It appears that the LD50 in the mice is going to be much greater than the LD50 in guinea pigs. If we do a TTD experiment with mice soon, perhaps we ought to do the following:
4 mice get 10e4 at noon.
4 mice get 10e5 about 4-5 pm.
This should give us deaths starting the next day in the morning, and finishing before the end of the afternoon.
-bruce
DXer said
Here Dr. Ivins in March 2007 again was working at 10 PM making animal observations.
Dr. Ivins spent exactly the amount of time after hours in late September 2001 and early October 2001 as you would expect.
If Dr. Patricia Fellows spun things in any way different, then she is the one to ask about the subject. We don’t have the benefit of her deposition because the DOJ apparently shredded it.
In any event, the DOJ would not provide it pursuant to FOIA. I was too appreciative of their efforts regarding a dozen other civil depositions to have filed an administrative appeal. Relatedly, I have confidence in James K’s expertise in citing the protective order applicable to the Fellows and Linscott depositions.
As Dr. Andrews explained in his civil deposition that I’ve uploaded, the FBI’s statistical analysis was confused because it was only done for hours at the one location rather than, for example, hours spent at Building 1412 where sprays rather than injections were done. But it was even more fundamentally flawed because the investigators did not take into account that the 2-person rule implemented in January 2002, for a time, prevented such after hours work involving the animal observations and plating.
GAO, this messed-up use of statistics is a key bit of the scientific evidence relied upon by the FBI.
All the other science was exculpatory.
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
Mouse LD50 from 28 FEB 07 -Deaths as of Day 3 Saturday, March 03, 2007 10:03:07 PM
(b) (6)
(b) (6)
Here are the death data as of Day 3 (Saturday night, 3 March) from the FEB 28 07 mouse LD50:
1 400 spores 414 spores 144 spores 45.2 spores 13.2 spores
Bruce Ivins
7 dead 4 dead
6 dead 2 dead 1 dead
DXer said
Given that Dr. Ivins was under surveillance in 2007, it is unclear how the FBI would not have known of his regular after hours work in connection with these animal experiments. Here, for example, is a representative email on March 5, 2007 at 9 PM.
From: To:
Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
RE: Mouse LD50 from 28 FEB 07 -Deaths as of Day 5 Monday, March 05, 2007 9:05:07 PM
(b) (6)
Here are the death data as of Day 5 ( Monday night, 5 March) from the FEB 28 07 mouse LD50:
1 400 spores 414 spores 144 spores 45.2 spores 13.2 spores This was with the SA 1749 spores prepared at RIID.
Bruce Ivins
DXer said
He also would work late Sunday PM long before 9/11.
From: To:
Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Aerosol challenges Sunday, June 25, 2000 8:24:06 PM
(b) (6)
Hi, everyone, We are scheduled to aerosol challenge 28 rabbits on Tuesday, July 11, and 28 rabbits on Tuesday,
July 13, with anthrax spores. This should be the second, and hopefully last, comparison of the two PA preps.
– Bruce
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID; RE: Spread plate vs. Pour Plate Sunday, June 25, 2000 8:17:17 PM
(b) (6)
I also sent you requested info on how endotoxin and phenol were assayed in spore preps. – Bruce
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Sent: Sunday, July 2, 2000 10:36 PM
Subject: Spore challenge
Are we still on for the challenge of the second set of guinea pigs this Thursday, or do we have to w(a6i)t again? > >- Bruce
Dr. Ivins lived near the lab. As a professional, it was not uncommon for him to work nights or weekends. Dr. Andrews has pulled an all-nighter at the lab.
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Spread plate vs. Pour Plate Sunday, June 25, 2000 2:14:51 PM
(b) (6)
(b)
Hi, – Bruce
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: EA 101 Sunday, May 06, 2001 3:14:31 PM
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2000 7:14 PM
People that punch a clock — hourly employees — are more apt to work 9-5.
Dr. Ivins would be in late Friday night too.
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: Potency Test Review Friday, May 19, 2000 10:52:00 PM
(b) (6)
(b)
(6) I’ve given my previous message to you some more thought. I’m SURE that one way that could increase the potency of their vaccine
People who argue that it was unusual for Dr. Ivins to be in the lab in late September 2001 and early October 2001 perhaps punch a clock at 5 pm and don’t do the research as necessary to support their assertions.
Perhaps if they had worked the “after hours” necessary to get their job done, Amerithrax would not have been botched.
DXer said
If animal tech AB had not thrown out the cage cards in 2004, the documents for each cage would have been available. Time of death is a central part of the observation required in such experiments.
From: To: Subject: Date:
Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
FW: TTD determinations Friday, March 09, 2007 9:50:48 AM
(b) (6)
(b)
–
here are the results of yesterday’s Time-To-Death determination. It looks promising as a way to (s6c)reen virulence of anthracis strains.
* **************************
Select Agent # 1749 11 mice injected with 1.06 X 10e4 spores in 0.2 ml, IP
11 mice injected with 1.06 X 10e5 spores in 0.2 ml, IP ************************** TTD – 1.06 X 10e4
1. 19hr
2. 19hr
3. 21hr
4, 22.5 hr
5, 23hr
6, 23.5 hr
7. 24hr
8. 24.5 hr
9. >28 hr
10. >28 hr
***********************
TTD – 1.06 X 10e5
1. 15hr
2. 16hr
3. 16hr
4. 17hr
5. 17.5 hr
6. 18hr
7. 20hr
8. 21hr
9. 21hr
10. 21 hr
11. >24 hr ******************************
I don’t know if we want to base our TTD determinations on median values (which would here have been 23.25 hr and 18 hours) or on the mean values of, say…the first five or six animals that died, since the “stragglers” really skew the TTD results.
-bruce
Bruce Ivins
DXer said
For years, Bruce served as an alternate on the animal care committee. The lay people, prosecutors and investigators without the same level of experience in animal experiments, did not understand the importance of obtaining the rabbit protocols so as to understand what Dr. Ivins was doing in the lab the last week of September 2001 and the first week of October 2001. Indeed, proponents of an Ivins Theory evidence no understanding of the rabbit formaldehyde experiment and applicable protocol at all.
From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
RE: memorandum (UNCLASSIFIED)
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Thanks, Changing the euthanasia times a relatively small amount doesn’t seem to be a major violation of the protocol, but rather an acceptable (and in this case, understandable) minor deviation. I’d be more concerned if a procedure were conducted on the rabbits that was not in the protocol.
(b)(6)
-bruce
Bruce Ivins
—–Original Message—– From: Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 4:48 PM To:
Bruce E Dr USAMRIID;
Subject: FW: memorandum (UNCLASSIFIED) I
Hi all, We have two animal welfare concerns to discuss at our meeting tomorrow.
Ivins,
(b)(6) sent the attached MFR to me yesterday and came to discuss the issue with me. He was self- reporting that he didn’t follow his protocol exactly as written. He also included information about a deceased rabbit discovered during the breakdown of a shipment of rabbits from a vendor and his concern about possible illness in two other rabbits from this vendor. Tomorrow and I will give a brief synopsis of our understanding on this incident.
(b)(6)The second incident is with mice under protocol. I should have a memo on this incident ready for you by 1100 tomorrow.
Please keep this information confidential. If you have questions that can’t wait until the meeting please give me a call or come by tomorrow.
DXer said
I’m reminded by this news story last week about a blind sheik supporter charged in a murder-for-hire plot, that not only does law enforcement regularly have very difficult and vexing mysteries to solve, but they are dealing often with very dangerous and violent people. Mafia, street violence, violent jihadists, drug cartels… We should be slow to be too harsh in the rush of events they did not have a chance to get down to some document room to read through thousands of pages of documents. Absent direct evidence in the form of documents, we can presume everyone’s good faith. Moreover, this case illustrates the important work that undercovers do.
Forrest Fenn writes:
“When I was in the 8th grade our English teacher gave the class an assignment to write a story with these rules. It should be as short as possible, and include religion, sex, and be a mystery.
After about 8 seconds I turned in my novel in. It said:
“My God, I’m pregnant, I wonder who did it.”
The teacher fainted and I got an F on the course”
Stanley, remind me: which defendant in this cigarette case did you represent?
Blind Sheik Supporter Charged in Murder-for-Hire Plot
by Abha Shankar • Oct 18, 2013
Two men being held in jail while awaiting trial for cigarette trafficking are accused of plotting to kill witnesses against them. In an indictment unsealed in Brooklyn Supreme Court Thursday,
Basel Ramadan and Yousseff Odeh are charged with conspiracy to murder witnesses and with soliciting a potential hit man.
The murder-for-hire plot was hatched from New York City’s Rikers Island jail where the two have been held since their May arrest on the initial cigarette-trafficking and money laundering charges.
The Staten Island Advance reports that Odeh was a supporter of blind sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, the spiritual guide for the 1993 World Trade Center bombers who is serving a life sentence at the Supermax penitentiary in Colorado for his role in a subsequent conspiracy to bomb several New York landmarks.
Odeh also reportedly had close ties to Abdel Sattar, a key associate of the blind sheik. Sattar was convicted in 2005 for aiding Rahman in his efforts to direct terrorist activities from his cell in the United States.
Odeh and Ramadan were charged with 14 others last spring for their alleged involvement in a cigarette trafficking ring that laundered more than $55 million in illegal proceeds and evaded more than $80 million in New York taxes. Similar schemes in the past have helped fund terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hizballah.
The new indictment alleges that in August, Odeh and Ramadan gave someone “descriptive information” about people they expected to serve as witnesses against them, including their names and addresses. Ramadan then made a phone call from Rikers Island Sept. 17 seeking a contract killer. But his call went to an undercover police officer. Ramadan told the undercover officer that he has “one of those problems” and expressed his appreciation when the officer said he could “take care of it.”
Ramadan and Odeh face from 25 years to life in prison if convicted on the new charges.
DXer said
The documents indicate that the 52 rabbits were shipped from Covance to USAMRIID by CRP, which stands for Covance Research Products.
COVANCE RESEARCH PRODUCTS INC … – TruckDriver.com
http://www.truckdriver.com/trucking-company…/ShowDOTCo.cfm?CENSUS…
Trucking Company. COVANCE RESEARCH PRODUCTS INC ALSO DOING BUSINESS AS: CRP 310 SWAMPBRIDGE ROAD DENVER, PA 17517
DXer said
The USG only produced the relevant Lab Notebook AFTER I summarized the rabbits documents I could gather in this thread
Thus, this summary of rabbit documents was in July 2012 is incomplete — and the key laboratory notebook was not produced in September 2012.
GAO, while we ponder who was responsible for its withholding, we can separately consider: who was responsible for its production over 4 years after Dr. Ivins’ death.
Where is the government accountability?
Vahid is confident that his former boss, Jim Comey (who is now the FBI DIrector), will cover his back. But is that how government accountability supposed to work?
Aren’t we all supposed to be interested in the same thing — reconstructing what Ivins was doing in the lab in late September 2001 and October 2001?
For that, don’t we all want the same thing — to retrieve and obtain the very best contemporaneous documents?
Who at DOJ or FBI, if anyone, acted contrary to that goal?
* Three notebooks from the FBI have now been released on the FOIA website
heads up – Notebook 4241 is a blockbuster – recounting his work on the rabbits – first week of October
… the formaldehyde experiment
Posted by Lew Weinstein on September 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/three-notebooks-from-the-fbi-have-now-been-released-on-the-foia-website/
GAO: Who is responsible for withholding this notebook showing what Dr. Ivins was doing in the lab the first week of October 2001?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on September 4, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/gao-who-is-responsible-for-withholding-this-notebook-showing-what-dr-ivins-was-doing-in-the-lab-the-first-week-of-october-2001/
DXer said
The documentary record establishes USAMRIID’s good faith effort in responding to a myriad of FOIA requests. But now the others involved in the experiment need to be contacted and asked to think hard about what contemporaneous documents they might have.
DXer said
Re Rumor of 1997 PETA anthrax attack led to FBI inquiry
Comment: I personally don’t credit that this rumor was more than unreliable hearsay and hyperbole. The FBI, however, certainly was doing its job in investigating it. Years ago I worked for a time pro bono on the Silver Springs monkey case — for the doctor ; Alex Pacheco of PETA had infiltrated the doctor’s lab. The issue was procedural and it was a long time ago so I don’t remember anything about it beyond what I read in Wikipedia. Counsel was his neighbor and was helping out his friend, the doctor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Spring_monkeys
From Wikipedia:
“The Silver Spring monkeys were 17 wild-born macaque monkeys from the Philippines who lived inside the Institute of Behavioral Research in Silver Spring, Maryland.[2] From 1981 until 1991, they became what one writer called the most famous lab animals in history, as a result of a battle between animal researchers, animal advocates, politicians, and the courts over whether to use them in research or release them to a sanctuary. Within the scientific community, the monkeys became known for their use in experiments into neuroplasticity—the ability of the adult primate brain to reorganize itself—regarded as one of the most exciting discoveries of the 20th century.”
“…In May 1981, Alex Pacheco of the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) began working undercover in the lab, and alerted police to what PETA viewed as unacceptable living conditions for the monkeys.”
“In what was the first police raid in the U.S. against an animal researcher, police entered the Institute and removed the monkeys, charging Taub with 17 counts of animal cruelty and failing to provide adequate veterinary care. He was convicted on six counts; five were overturned during a second trial, and the final conviction was overturned on appeal in 1983, when the court ruled that Maryland’s animal cruelty legislation did not apply to federally funded laboratories.[2]”
During the subsequent dissection of the monkeys, it was discovered that significant cortical remapping had occurred, suggesting that being forced to use limbs with no sensory input had triggered changes in their brains’ organization.[7] This evidence of the brain’s plasticity helped overturn the widely held view that the adult brain cannot reorganize itself in response to its environment.[8] After five years of receiving death threats and being unable to find a research position, Taub was offered a grant by the University of Alabama, where he developed a new form of therapy, based on the concept of neuroplasticity, for people disabled as a result of brain damage. Known as constraint-induced movement therapy, it has helped stroke survivors regain the use of limbs paralysed for many years, and has been hailed by the American Stroke Association as at the forefront of a revolution.[9
During the subsequent dissection of the monkeys, it was discovered that significant cortical remapping had occurred, suggesting that being forced to use limbs with no sensory input had triggered changes in their brains’ organization.[7] This evidence of the brain’s plasticity helped overturn the widely held view that the adult brain cannot reorganize itself in response to its environment.[8] After five years of receiving death threats and being unable to find a research position, Taub was offered a grant by the University of Alabama, where he developed a new form of therapy, based on the concept of neuroplasticity, for people disabled as a result of brain damage. Known as constraint-induced movement therapy, it has helped stroke survivors regain the use of limbs paralysed for many years, and has been hailed by the American Stroke Association as at the forefront of a revolution.[9]”
—
At a bar here yesterday I met a med student who had a PhD in neurology and was describing his animal experiments involving mice. I was describing my view that Dr. Ivins’ “alibi” hinges on people reconstructing the contemporaneous records. It depends on everyone realizing — and it being proved through documents — that the 52 rabbits were shipped from Covance, arriving 9/24/2001 and were housed in the two rooms in the hot suite (across from B313). I believe some of those on the investigation don’t seem to realize what the “hot suite” encompassed and so are misinterpreting the key card access data. Within a week, I am hoping to get documents without any redactions — many of the documents I’ve uploaded were produced under FOIA and thus were redacted.
Rumor of 1997 PETA anthrax attack led to FBI inquiry
Posted to: News Norfolk PETA
By Corinne Reilly
The Virginian-Pilot
© October 19, 2013
The FBI in the late 1990s looked into claims that the group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals was planning an anthrax attack near Washington, D.C., and moved its headquarters here to distance itself from the contamination zone.
According to FBI documents, agents in Maryland began investigating a tip in 1997 that PETA was targeting the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, or USAMRIID, which is based at Fort Detrick and does testing on animals.
According to a document dated November 1997, a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve told FBI investigators he learned from someone with ties to PETA that the group had “a long-range plan to create a major incident.”
“Part of PETA’s long-range plan is to infiltrate by gaining employment with various research facilities,” the document says. “PETA intends to create an incident… that would benefit their cause. PETA intends to cause a release of anthrax.”
PETA moved its headquarters from Rockville, Md., to Norfolk in 1996. The document suggests it was believed that the move was made to avoid exposure.
Another FBI report dated January 1998 says a source told investigators that a female PETA operative had managed to get a job at USAMRIID in order to “orchestrate the anthrax release.” The report identifies the person by name, but the name is redacted in the version that The Virginian-Pilot relied on for this article.
The report adds that a check revealed that no one by that name was working at Fort Detrick.
The Pilot got the FBI records from PETA, which obtained them in February of this year through a Freedom of Information Act request. The newspaper asked PETA for the documents after the group’s president, Ingrid Newkirk, mentioned them in a letter published in the November issue of Harper’s magazine. Her letter was in response to an article by a man who discovered he was once a Unabomber suspect.
“It seems the FBI is bent on making those of us who have nothing to do with terrorism fit into its paranoid jigsaw puzzle,” Newkirk wrote.
It has long been known that FBI counterterrorism investigators monitored PETA for years, most aggressively after 9/11. But the group didn’t learn about the anthrax allegations until this year, Newkirk said in an interview.
“I was bowled over by it,” she said. “It was such a disappointment. I don’t know if someone just hated us, but it’s Alice in Wonderland. It’s total fantasy.”
PETA never attempted or wanted to infiltrate USAMRIID, Newkirk said.
An FBI spokesman said the bureau doesn’t discuss its investigations but that it has an obligation to look into such claims.
It’s not clear from the documents how far the anthrax inquiry went, although the FBI continued to investigate PETA for years. The bureau’s actions were criticized by the American Civil Liberties Union and the inspector general of the Justice Department.
Authorities tracked Newkirk’s international travel, monitored PETA demonstrations, surveilled and photographed its headquarters, and asked for the building’s security codes, Newkirk said.
She said the FBI once inquired about the thickness of the building’s windows and whether they would withstand bullets.
DXer said
“At a bar here yesterday I met a med student who had a PhD in neurology and was describing his animal experiments involving mice. I was describing my view that Dr. Ivins’ “alibi” hinges on people reconstructing the contemporaneous records. It depends on everyone realizing — and it being proved through documents — that the 52 rabbits were shipped from Covance, arriving 9/24/2001 and were housed in the two rooms in the hot suite (across from B313). I believe some of those on the investigation don’t seem to realize what the “hot suite” encompassed and so are misinterpreting the key card access data. Within a week, I am hoping to get documents without any redactions — many of the documents I’ve uploaded were produced under FOIA and thus were redacted.”
Comment:
The FBI was investigating a rumored infiltration by PETA during the 1997/1998 period. (I think of PETA as being innovative and law-abiding but it was a possible lead that needed to be addressed). At the same time, the FBI allowed USAMRIID’s Bruce Ivins to give virulent Ames to a non-citizen, Tarek Hamouda, whose friends were recruited to jihad by Ayman Zawahiri. One friend, “Tawfiq” Hamid, tells me he withdrew only when they asked him to bury a security officer near the mosque. “Tawfiq” is the author of INSIDE JIHAD.
I have no biases — or rather, I am not controlled by my biases. Some of my dearest friends are PETA supporters and Egyptians. And I have no problems with an Iranian (who came to this country years ago) being the FBI’s head WMD fellow. Or a Palestinian being the lead Amerithrax prosecutor whose daughter represented anthrax weapons suspect Ali Al-Timimi for free.
But I do get gravely concerned when I know Dr. Ayman Zawahiri was actively recruiting scientists throughout the 1990s in connection with anthrax. .. and then I learn that Dr. Hamouda, a friend of some of Dr. Ayman’s recruits, was supplied virulent Ames such as was used in the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings. One senior Egyptian jihadist released from prison in 2002 in a published interview (in an Egyptian paper) said that Dr. Ayman had made 15 attempts in 10 years and first had the idea in 1991 or so.
The FBI first obtained the correspondence between Bruce Ivins and Tarek Hamouda in Spring 2005. That was really negligent. The FBI majorly dropped the ball not to have obtained the correspondence years earlier. Amerithrax represents the greatest failure in counterintelligence analysis in the history of the United States.
Given Dr. Ivins was known in October 2001 to have the largest repository of Ames in the world, during the first week the question should have been: “Hey, Bruce, have you given virulent Ames to any former Zawahiri associates recently?”
Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman: The Infiltration of US Biodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
For additional background of the story, see the FBI’s Inspector General report. ABC explains that “The investigation of PETA began in the FBI’s Norfolk, Va., office in the spring of 2001, when one of the group’s members was suspected of “providing financial support to members of the Animal Liberation Front and other animal rights extremists to conduct direct actions,” such as destroying property or research operations involving animals.” Note that the fascinating new story has additional detail pushing the timeline back to 1997 and 1998, and USAMRIID in Frederick, MD. I think the story has legs on it. So do my guinea pigs Lulu and Lucy.
http://topics.syracuse.com/tag/guinea%20pig/photos.html
ABC explained: “That preliminary investigation mushroomed into a wide-ranging probe of PETA and a number of its affiliate organizations that continued for six years. No criminal activity was ever documented and, the inspector general concluded, the investigation extended beyond the point at which it was justified.”
FBI Spied on PETA, Greenpeace, Anti-War Activists
WASHINGTON, Sept. 20, 2010
By JACK CLOHERTY and JASON RYAN
JASON RYAN More From Jason »
JACK CLOHERTY More From Jack »
Producer
The FBI improperly targeted Greenpeace, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and two antiwar groups in domestic terrorism investigations between 2001 and 2006, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice said in a report released today.
The IG found there was “little or no basis” for the terror investigations, and that they were “unreasonable and inconsistent with FBI policy.”
At least two of the investigations resulted in innocent people being placed on the domestic terror watch list for years, and one resulted in FBI Director Robert Mueller providing Congress with “inaccurate and misleading information,” according to the report.
PETA slammed the FBI for using “McCarthyite tactics.”
“PETA’s effective activism scare well-heeled business interests that abuse animals,” spokeswoman Jane Dollinger said “but when these outfits used their connections to violate the U.S. Constitution, the FBI’s ham-handed attempt to catch us with our pants down backfired. As a result, the FBI was caught with its pants down.”
The FBI launched five domestic terror investigations between 2001 and 2006 that were “unreasonable and inconsistent with FBI policy,” the inspector general found.
The inspector general, Glenn Fine, is charged with conducting investigations of Justice Department employees and programs. …
The investigation of PETA began in the FBI’s Norfolk, Va., office in the spring of 2001, when one of the group’s members was suspected of “providing financial support to members of the Animal Liberation Front and other animal rights extremists to conduct direct actions,” such as destroying property or research operations involving animals.
That preliminary investigation mushroomed into a wide-ranging probe of PETA and a number of its affiliate organizations that continued for six years. No criminal activity was ever documented and, the inspector general concluded, the investigation extended beyond the point at which it was justified.
Meanwhile, two individuals under investigation in the case remained on the terrorist travel watch list until 2006.
DXer said
Here is the Report by the FBI’s Office of the Inspector General.
A Review of the FBI’s Investigations of Certain Domestic Advocacy Groups
Click to access s1009r.pdf
I think at the end of the day many people could agree that:
(1) the FBI often is going to be damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
(2) it is easy to second-guess the FBI with the benefit of hindsight, a lot harder to do better.
(3) our government works best, when it does work, because of the government oversight functions such as Inspector Generals, the GAO, the media, public citizens and activist groups.
(4) PETA and groups advocating for peace do important work.
Everyone could stand to have their work checked and missteps pointed out. It doesn’t make the FBI’s job any less important or their work on the country’s behalf any less appreciated.
FBI Director Comey recently commented to a top ACLU person: (paraphrasing) Keep banging me so I’ll never get too impressed with hearing my own voice. I’ll always try to understand the other’s point of view and check my facts.
Vahid Majidi should check his facts under the documents relating to the 52 rabbits and pick up the phone to his former boss and friend Comey.
Busy superiors count on those below to do precisely that. Vahid has voluntarily undertaken to write a book on the subject — having left the FBI is no reason not to study the documents and check his facts.
DXer said
The Silver Spring Monkeys: The Case That Launched PETA
http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/the-silver-spring-monkeys.aspx
PETA settled in Norfolk because that’s where it found the most affordable office space. It acquired its four-story building for $2.2 million.
PETA’s penny-pinching ways have helped it grow from a ragtag band of volunteers into a $17 million-a-year organization with 132 employees — 96 of them in Norfolk — and branch offices in England, Italy, Germany and India. PETA’s donations are about twice those of the American Humane Association, one of the country’s oldest national animal welfare groups.
or PETA, success has meant altering the behavior of multi-billion-dollar corporations from General Motors to McDonald’s. It has cajoled, bullied and embarrassed world-famous fashion designers, research hospitals and medical schools into changing their policies. It has won endorsements from dozens of Hollywood celebrities.
“People now know that if they do something ghastly to an animal, they can’t necessarily get away with it,” Newkirk says. “When we started, nobody knew what animal rights meant. . . . Now, it’s an issue.”
Key to PETA’s results-oriented strategy is manipulating the media. It has learned that the more outrageous, provocative — even offensive — its methods are, the more attention it gets. Attracting that attention is the job of PETA’s campaigns department, which has one of the largest staffs at the organization’s Norfolk headquarters. Press coverage translates into donations, volunteers and clout. Even PETA’s enemies concede that its strategy has worked.
“PETA thinks there is no such thing as bad media coverage,” says Rick McCarty, director of issues management at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. “And they’re very unrepentant about it.”
Last year, PETA enlisted the help of actor James Cromwell, who played the kindly farmer in the movie “Babe,” to narrate an undercover video that showed farmhands bludgeoning sows at a hog farm in Camden County, N.C. PETA’s investigation resulted in the first-ever felony indictments against factory farm workers.
J.P. Goodwin, founder of the Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade, lashed out at PETA in an online forum in June, charging that its “goofy stunts” are turning people off and obscuring the movement’s core issue, animal suffering.
“We are right on the issues,” Goodwin said. “However, some people have positioned the movement as flaky, based on silly claims and goofy stunts. It’s time to say no to pie throwing, manure dumping, and naked models, and get back to talking about animals.”
..
Is there anything Newkirk won’t do to get her message out?
Yes, she says: “I won’t cause physical pain and suffering unnecessarily to any living being — man or mouse.”
…
Every week I hear of some scientist getting a threatening letter, phone call or e-mail,” Calnan says. “None of it is under PETA’s signature. But PETA is contributing by its notoriety, by its demonization of scientists.”
A year ago, anonymous animal rights activists calling themselves “The Justice Department” sent threatening letters booby-trapped with razor blades to more than 80 research scientists.
No one was injured. But the act touched off a bitter war of words.
Within days, Newkirk sent letters to the editors of several newspapers in cities where the scientists lived. “Perhaps the mere idea of receiving a nasty missive will allow animal researchers to empathize with their victims for the first time in their lousy careers,” she wrote.
Newkirk was “basically cheerleading the violence,” Calnan says. “She did not denounce the violence. She’s part of the rhetoric of polarization, the rhetoric of hatred.”
Newkirk says she wasn’t cheerleading the mailing of booby-trapped letters, merely using it to make a point. “We didn’t do it,” she says. “We don’t advocate it; we never would. It’s not what we do. … All I did was comment on it.”
Calnan and other critics say that by seeming to condone that tactic and others, including vandalism and firebombing of animal laboratories by radical animal advocates, PETA helps foster a chilling effect on animal research.
“Very promising students are choosing not to go into the life sciences,” Calnan says. “Even of those who go into the life sciences, some will choose not to work with animals. Some folks say we have lost a generation because of the animal rights influence, and specifically PETA’s influence, in the schools. PETA will say that’s a victory. I say that is a blow to medical progress.”
…
PETA has earned the enmity of the animal research community with a series of explosive undercover investigations.
A case in point was the work of Edward Walsh and JoAnn McGee, a husband-wife team of scientists at Boys Town National Research Hospital in Omaha, Neb. The two studied congenital deafness by cutting open the skulls of kittens and severing a bundle of nerves, which caused the kittens to go deaf.
PETA argues that such experiments, besides being cruel, are unnecessary.
Prompted by an employee’s complaint, two PETA investigators got jobs as security guards in the lab and collected evidence for a year.
…
As for PETA, he says, “they simply cannot disconnect themselves from the more radical elements of this movement.
PETA is the voice of the movement, and it is, therefore, by my way of thinking at least, responsible for the actions that the organization inspires.”
…
Some people who had bought into PETA’s campaign for kindness to animals were surprised last summer by the revelation that PETA kills animals.
The controversy shed light on a major rift within the animal rights movement between those, like PETA, that support euthanasia and those that don’t.
According to statistics kept by state regulators, PETA euthanized 1,325 of the 2,103 animals it took in during 1999.
“For an organization that feels there’s a place for every fish in the sea, I could not believe that they would kill healthy cats,” says Dr. Gail Furman, a psychologist at the Department of Veterans’ Affairs Medical Center in Hampton.
…
The “no-kill” debate may have contributed to the quiet departure last year of Alex Pacheco, who as a young political science student helped Newkirk found PETA 20 years ago.
Pacheco left PETA to found a new nonprofit organization based in Los Angeles, the Humane America Animal Foundation, which lists as its No. 1 mission the creation of a “no-kill nation” by promoting aggressive spay-neuter and adoption strategies.
Pacheco declined to talk with The Virginian-Pilot, but in an interview with Animals’ Agenda magazine he said his split with PETA was driven in part by a concern that PETA’s confrontational tactics didn’t immediately result in saving large numbers of animals.
“I could’ve stayed and argued my case, but I stopped when things started flying across the room,” he was quoted as saying. “I didn’t want to cause a civil war.”
Newkirk acknowledges that she and Pacheco were frequently at loggerheads.
“Our differences go back to the very beginning,” she says. “We were like Jack Spratt and his wife. We argued about everything.
“In the end we both decided that we had to have a professional divorce.”
Conceding that “I’m no diplomat,” Newkirk adds: “One of Alex’s strong suits is, he made an extremely good lobbyist. It’s a bit awkward, when he’s up arguing in the halls of Congress, to have us out on the street dumping manure or going naked.”
http://www.furcommission.com/petas-zeal-pushes-the-envelope-too-far-for-some/
DXer said
Ms. Newkirk wrote a book called Free the Animals! The Untold Story of the U.S. Animal Liberation Front and Its Founder, ‘Valerie.’
“In it she writes that she has “become somewhat used to jumping on a plane with copies of freshly purloined documents and hurriedly calling news conferences to discuss the ALF’s findings.”
http://www.activistcash.com/person/ingrid-newkirk/
In the 1970s, Newkirk worked for Montgomery County (Maryland), and then for the District of Columbia, as an animal protection officer and deputy sheriff.
She co-founded PETA with Alex Pacheco, the fellow who had infiltrated the lab in the Silver Springs monkey case.
Who was the woman that, according to the rumor that never was substantiated, was going to work at USAMRIID?
What would the position have been? A security guard? An animal care technician?
“According to a document dated November 1997, a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve told FBI investigators he learned from someone with ties to PETA that the group had “a long-range plan to create a major incident.”
“Part of PETA’s long-range plan is to infiltrate by gaining employment with various research facilities,” the document says. “PETA intends to create an incident… that would benefit their cause. PETA intends to cause a release of anthrax.” ”
What does this lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve say today?
Given the modus operandi of infiltration and undercover jobs, PETA should agree that any possibility of infiltration of a lab using animals involving anthrax needed to be followed up.
I admire Alex’s decision to prioritize saving lives through aggressive neutering and adoption programs. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course to take on behalf of the humane treatment of animals .
Issues relating to the humane treatment of humans are also challenging and complicated.
Here’s a book I wrote (under a pseudonym) on the humane treatment of animals (and humans).
Public Pets: Good Advice For Everyday Living
http://www.blurb.com/b/909779-public-pets
DXer said
Comment:
Ingrid, I am only now learning more about the history of PETA and ALF. Were you part of that Maryland ALF cell? Were you the person who, according to the rumor, wanted to infiltrate USAMRIID? Were you a deputy sheriff in 1982 responding to the publicity triggered by the Silver Springs case?
Nonviolent efforts are to be commended. Violent efforts, of course, need to stopped by law enforcement.
The case study of abolitionist John Brown is equally fascinating — though the example set by Abraham Lincoln the better model in effecting social change.
The Wikipedia article on Animal Liberation Front is fascinating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Liberation_Front
Kathy Snow Guillermo writes in Monkey Business that the first ALF action [in the United States] was the removal on September 22, 1981 of the Silver Spring monkeys.
17 lab monkeys [were] in the legal custody of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) after a researcher who had been experimenting on them was arrested for alleged violations of cruelty legislation.
When the court ruled that the monkeys be returned to the researcher, they mysteriously disappeared, only to reappear five days later when PETA learned that legal action against the researcher could not proceed without the monkeys as evidence.[41]
Ingrid Newkirk, the president of PETA, writes that the first ALF cell was set up in late 1982, after a police officer she calls “Valerie” responded to the publicity triggered by the Silver Spring monkeys case, and flew to England to be trained by the ALF. Posing as a reporter, Valerie was put in touch with Ronnie Lee … . Lee directed her to a training camp, where she was taught how to break into laboratories. Newkirk writes that Valerie returned to Maryland and set up an ALF cell, with the first raid taking place on December 24, 1982 against Howard University, where 24 cats were removed, some of whose back legs had been crippled.[43][45] Jo Shoesmith, an American attorney and animal rights activist, says Newkirk’s account of “Valerie” is not only fictionalized, as Newkirk acknowledges, but totally fictitious.
“Animal Rights Militia and Justice Department
Monaghan writes that, around 1982, there was a noticeable shift in the non-violent position, and not one approved by everyone in the movement. Some activists began to make personal threats against individuals, followed by letter bombs and threats to contaminate food, the latter representing yet another shift to threatening the general public, rather than specific targets.[11]
In 1982, letter bombs were sent to all four major party leaders in the UK, including the prime minister, Margaret Thatcher. In November 1984, the first major food scare was carried out, with the ALF claiming in phone calls and letters to the media that it had contaminated Mars Bars—part of a campaign to force the Mars company to stop conducting tooth decay tests on monkeys.[51] On November 17, the Sunday Mirror received a call from the ALF saying it had injected Mars Bars in stores throughout the country with rat poison. The call was followed by a letter containing a Mars Bar, presumed to be contaminated, and the claim that these were on sale in London, Leeds, York, Southampton, and Coventry. Millions of bars were removed from shelves and Mars halted production, at a cost to the company of $4.5 million.[52] The ALF admitted the claims had been a hoax. Similar contamination claims were later made against L’Oréal and Lucozade.[53]
Activists use the Animal Rights Militia name when violating the ALF’s policy not to endanger life.[54]
The letter bombs were claimed by the Animal Rights Militia (ARM), although the initial statement in November 1984 by David Mellor, then a Home Office minister, made clear that it was the Animal Liberation Front who had claimed responsibility.[55] This is an early example of the shifting of responsibility from one banner to another depending on the nature of the act, with the ARM and another nom de guerre, the Justice Department—the latter first used in 1993—emerging as names for direct action that violated the ALF’s “no harm to living beings” principle. Ronnie Lee, who had earlier insisted on the importance of the ALF’s non-violence policy, seemed to support the idea. An article signed by RL—presumed to be Ronnie Lee—in the October 1984 ALF Supporters Group newsletter, suggested that activists set up “fresh groups … under new names whose policies do not preclude the use of violence toward animal abusers.”[56]
DXer said
With respect to any investigation of compartmentalized cell operation aiming to infiltrate USAMRIID, one has to go so slow in painting an FBI investigation with too broad a brush and being unduly PC over First Amendment issues of some other, non-violent group. The issue is whether the deed was done — and sometimes the deed can be as little as leaving a laboratory door unlocked.
But the key is intelligence analysis relating to the who, what, and where.
DXer said
Ingrid has a very compelling biography. And she also strikes me as a truth-teller. Ingrid, what is the name of the person redacted from the January FBI 1998 report so we can ask her if she ever worked at USAMRIID. Was the rumor based on brainstorming — and the facetious hyperbole sometimes discussed in brainstorming?
“Another FBI report dated January 1998 says a source told investigators that a female PETA operative had managed to get a job at USAMRIID in order to “orchestrate the anthrax release.” The report identifies the person by name, but the name is redacted in the version that The Virginian-Pilot relied on for this article.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingrid_Newkirk
It was Pacheco who introduced Newkirk to the concept of animal rights. Pacheco presented her with a copy of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation (1975). She has said that Singer had put into words what she had felt intuitively for a long time.
In the summer of 1981, Pacheco took a job as a volunteer inside the Institute of Behavioral Research in Silver Spring, Maryland, so that he and Newkirk would have some firsthand knowledge on which to base their campaigns.
Pacheco repeatedly went into the lab at night to take photographs, and to escort scientists, including veterinarians and a primatologist, through it to secure their testimony.[17] Newkirk lay crouched on the back seat of a car outside, hidden under a large cardboard box with holes for her eyes, using a walkie-talkie from a toy store to alert Pacheco if anyone else entered the building.[
Newkirk has been criticized for publicizing actions carried out in the name of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). She supports the goals of the ALF, arguing that “Not until black demonstrators resorted to violence did the national government work seriously for civil rights legislation … In 1850 white abolitionists, having given up on peaceful means, began to encourage and engage in actions that disrupted plantation operations and liberated slaves. Was that all wrong?”[7] She has said that she understands, but shrinks from, actions that involve arson:
I do support getting animals out in the same way I would have supported getting human slaves out, child labor, sex slaves, the whole lot. But I don’t support burning. I don’t support arson. I would rather that these buildings weren’t standing, so on some level I understand. I just don’t like the idea of that. Maybe that is wishy-washy of me, because I don’t want those buildings standing if they are going to hurt anyone. And the ALF has never hurt mice nor mare.[21]
She has been accused of having had advance knowledge of one ALF action. During the 1995 trial of Rod Coronado, in connection with an arson attack at Michigan State University (MSU), U.S. Attorney Michael Dettmer alleged that Newkirk had arranged, in advance of the attack, to have Coronado send her stolen documents from the university and a videotape of the action.[22]
DXer said
Alex Pacheco’s biography is also compelling. It was his and Ingrid’s efforts that led eventually to the “requirement that each institution seeking federal funding have an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee whose job it is to oversee how laboratory animals within that institution are cared for.”
That Committee at USAMRIID oversaw Bruce Ivins experiments involving the 52 rabbits. Norm Covert, for example, was on the committee in 2001.
GAO should obtain the very best contemporaneous documents on that experiment — which was conducted in late September 2001 and October 2001 in Bruce Ivins B3 “hot suite.”
The claim that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab those weeks was mistaken.
It is time to correct the mistake.
Stand for justice for animals.
Stand for justice for humans.
Stand for justice at the United States Department of Justice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Pacheco_(activist)
The legal battle for custody of the monkeys, following their removal by PETA, reached the United States Supreme Court. It was the first animal-rights case to do so, though the newly formed PETA ultimately failed in its battle to secure the animals’ release.[7] The proceedings, which lasted years, generated a large amount of publicity for PETA, transforming it from what Ingrid Newkirk called “five people in a basement” into a national movement.[8] As a result of the case, the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Science, Research and Technology held hearings that led to the 1985 Animal Welfare Act,[9] and in 1986 changes in United States Public Health Service guidelines for animals used in animal research included a requirement that each institution seeking federal funding have an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee whose job it is to oversee how laboratory animals within that institution are cared for.[4]
DXer said
Anthrax plot allegations prompted FBI to investigate PETA in late 1990s
By Associated Press, Updated: Sunday, October 20, 10:38 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/anthrax-plot-allegations-prompted-fbi-to-investigate-peta-in-late-1990s/2013/10/20/3b1a4e76-3995-11e3-b0e7-716179a2c2c7_story.html
…
The Virginian-Pilot (http://bit.ly/H421Gp ) says PETA obtained the documents earlier this year through a Freedom of Information Act request.
According to the documents, FBI investigators were told that PETA planned to release anthrax at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Washington, D.C.
PETA president Ingrid Newkirk tells the newspaper that the group didn’t learn about the anthrax allegations until this year
…
DXer said
Ingrid, the Maryland founder of co-founder of PETA with Alex Pacheco, worked for a quarter century or more as a Deputy Sheriff.
DXer said
In Fall 2001, it was publicly being suggested by this essayist that ALF be investigated by the FBI for the possibility of access to anthrax at a US lab.
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1101/1101ecoterrorist.htm
It was the FBI’s mantra, if not its actual practice, to leave “no stone unturned.” So the essay illustrates again that the FBI is going to be damned if they do and damned if they don’t. (That’s why they appreciate that it comes with the job.)
Use of anthrax only would predictably serve though to increase experimentation with animals, though, so the theory, for one, seems implausible from the start as to motive. The Fall 2001 anthrax mailings led to a great proliferation of labs.
Dr. Vahid Majidi says, in effect, that he ruled out Al Qaeda because he expected Sufaat and Rauf Ahmad — both quickly captured — to gleefully admit their crimes. Al Qaeda would have claimed responsibility he says. (Vahid actually didn’t mention Rauf Ahmad’s interrogation by the FBI at all but that is how the logic of his position works in reality). That is belied by the country’s experience.
Al Qaeda denied both 9/11 and the 1998 embassy bombings until beyond reasonable dispute.
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
The best way to learn about the care researchers took with animals under animal protocols at USAMRIID is simply to interview them. I once interviewed a member of the committee reviewing Bruce ivins’ protocol for the research on the 52 rabbits ad found him to be very conscientious.
Dr. Ivins himself in emails emphasized that the requirements under protocols were constantly evolving. Successive drafts would be exchanged among researchers and the animal protocol committee and then when everyone as on the same page, it would be executed. (The emails would attach the protocol drafts and so I had to separately pursue the attachments that had been inadvertently withheld over the years).
The GAO should obtain a copy of the rabbit protocol as finally executed. The number of the protocol is identified in Lab Notebook 4241 which was finally produced in 2012. I may be mistaken but I think it was a ProPublica/McClatchy appeal that lodged it loose.
Frank Malinowski is an example of a researcher at USAMRIID who could describe the importance of animal protocols.
” I retired from active duty to inactive reserves in mid-1992 and periodically went on active duty to support the Army’s intelligence services in various ways. I was promoted to LTColonel in 1994 and then retired from the Reserves a few years ago.
What were your duties?
My roles at RIID included working in their medical division, providing medical support to the employees (both civilian and military) of the Institute (this is the place with “hot suites” for handling dangerous pathogens like anthrax and ebola) and conducting clinical studies of new vaccines and drugs to prevent and/or treat those infections.”
DXer said
Ingrid Newkirk wrote the 1992 FREE THE ANIMALS! THE UNTOLD STORY OF THE ANIMAL LIBERATION FRONT AND ITS, FOUNDER, “VALERIE”
In the book, Ingrid explains that the details of the ALF laboratory raids and cell members are all “fictionalized to protect them from possible prosecution.”
Methinks that it could have been filed in the library section of autobiography rather than fictionalized memoir.
The cover has a person wearing a mask and holding a dog.
In an introduction, Cleveland Armory writes:
“One reason no one has written such a book about these people is that Animal Liberation Front operations in total secrecy. No insider would even admit to being a member of the group, let alone talk about it or write about it,
“and no outsider knows enough either to talk or write accurately about it.”
Rue McClanahan writes a blurb: “I cried and I cheered.”
Oliver Stone wrote a blurb: “A moving story about extreme cruelty and extreme courage, and a inspirational and practical guide for anyone bent on challenging the system.”
It was 1992 that Ingrid wrote: “As a result, the FBI has opened files on both PETA and me, and secured a wiretap order for our telephones.”
Thus, although it is interesting to learn from the Norfolk newspaper of the 1997 and 1998 FOIA documents, the FBI investigation actually dated to the Michigan State ALF arson.
Ingrid wrote in 1992:
“A long-time PETA volunteer’s home has just been raided by twelve agents…”
(The raid was in connection with an arson at a Michigan State University by an ALF member that Ingrid has said she admires; the US Attorney reportedly said Ingrid had asked the fellow in advance for documents and film.)
“At the time of the Silver Spring trial, she says “Valerie” [the ALF founder in the US] was 23, in her third year on the Montgomery County police force and one of only a handful of female officers.” She says “Valerie” was from England.
Ingrid, that describes you, right?
In a book that looks to be a good read, Ingrid describes how her colleagues on the police force arrested Dr. Taub — that was the start of the prosecution of the Silver Springs monkey case.
“Finally, although the public pays for most animal experimentation through its taxes, no one is allowed into a laboratory unannounced or unescorted. even police officers must have a warrant or formal invitation to enter. Except, that is, for a former policer officer named “Valerie.”
Ingrid writes:
“For the defense, IBR had retained Arnold & Porter, one of the country’s top firms. Three expensive lawyers in dark suits, their firm’s embossed on to their briefcase, had argued forcefully for the return of the monkeys.”
Ingrid describes “Valerie,” the ALF founder as from England an a former officer of the law and a Montgomery County, MD, police officer. Ingrid was from an England and was a Montgomery Deputy Sheriff for a quarter century.
Ingrid, you hid out in the car while Alex Pacheco was in Dr. Taub’s lab, right? You had a cardboard box over your head with holes cut — and a walkie talkie so as to call Alex if someone approached? If you were a Deputy Sheriff, doesn’t that mean law enforcement was using an agent for a warrantless search and seizure?
Just sayin… life is too short not to be fascinated by the ironies. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Did those expensive, nattily dressed A&P lawyers know that and raise a motion to exclude the evidence?
Ingrid writes:
“As for the laboratories’ own “Animal Care and Use Committees, they are typically composed of research colleagues who rubber-stamp each others’ protocols as enthusiastically as they helped each other through cruelty charges.”
In Amerithrax, the key is to obtain the protocol relating to the 52 rabbits formaldehde study. It is identified in lab Notebook 4241 which the FBI withheld until 2012. (It was taken from USAMRIID so that USAMRIID could not produce it).
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
Dr. Majidi writes:
“By some estimates, the total cost of the anthrax letters is closer to 100 billion dollars, when considering all the new programs created as the consequence of the Bacillus anthracis mailings.”
And, to think, it wouldn’t cost the USG one dime for Dr. Majidi to send evidence supporting his baseless and insupportable supposition that the 52 rabbits experiment was done at some other facility.
And with his misapprehension straightened out regarding Ivins-reason-for-being-in-the-lab issue, his Ivins Theory implodes and he and Rachel know it.
The move to make here is to say “aha!” Thanks so much for spending years getting the documents from USAMRIID. In the rush of events, we hadn’t seen them.
DXer said
Vahid Majidi writes:
“My interpretation of Bruce’s time in based on my own experience as a research scientist.”
Instead, Dr. Majidi’s interpretation of Bruce’s time should have been based on the contemporaneous documentary evidence. Although such documents (like his emails) and the documents above were not available to Bruce — by the time the FBI was asking — his emails and other documents WERE available to the FBI. They just didn’t obtain them. See the record.
Dr. Majidi nowhere evidences any awareness of the rabbit experiment.
I have personal knowledge — of a confidential nature — that he is confused on the subject and was unaware of the rabbit experiment.
So don’t think of Amerithrax as Rachel and Ken shoving 52 rabbits into a hat — just think of Dr. Majidi accidentally sitting on the hat and squashing the rabbits.
DXer said
Vahid Majidi:
Let’s do a thought experiment. Have your wife read your section conjecturing how Dr. Ivins spent his time — the one claiming that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab.
Then have her read these links above. See what she thinks. Tell her whether you had seen these documents before today and when you first saw them.
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
Look at Dr. Majidi’s analysis of Dr. Ivins’ in the lab. He evidences no awareness of all of what was happening with the experiment with the 52 rabbits. He is making conjectures that totally ignore the documentary evidence.
Amerithrax represents the greatest failure in intelligence analysis in the history of the United States and Dr. Vahid Majidi has just provided GAO a roadmap of the missteps.
DXer said
Was Dr. Majidi aware of these documents (see his argument about Dr. Ivins hours) and permitted them to be withheld from the FOIA production?
Or was he just unaware of them — buying into some earnest investigators claim that Dr. Ivins time was unexplained.
Sometimes you need to look behind some earnest Agent’s powerpoint and dig into the underlying documents, Dr. Majidi.
DXer said
Dr. Majjidi writes:
“As the FBI further probed for reasons behind these late night access to the hot suit[e]s, we found no experiments or projects with critical deadlines or any other reasons that justified for a researcher to work alone in a pathogen laboratory by themselves, late at night.”
Dr. Majidi, I have uploaded the evidence above. Your statement is contradicted by the documentary evidence. This documentary evidence has been uploaded for a very long time. Your recantation of the conclusory crap that you folks trotted out in August 2008 — without addressing the documentary evidence produced by USAMRIID since — is very disappointing. Mara explained that it would take 2 hours. Norm Covert can explain the animal protocols. You just bought into Pat Fellows’ spin. She provided technical assistance to the former Zawahiri associate supplied virulent Ames by Bruce Ivins and so I’m sure she was a bit stressed by Ivins, who himself was a stressed out and fragile fellow.
Animal protocols were constantly evolving. Have you ever done any animal research such as Dr. Ivins experiment that involved killing 52 rabbits mercifully? Do you know what is involved? Who specifically are you relying on — what expert — who has reviewed these documents. And most importantly, why weren’t these documents produced by the FBI under FOIA?
DXer said
Do you still believe Bruce Ivins was responsible for the 2001 anthrax attacks?
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/news/news_regular_features/daily_poll/poll_71ab3fa6-f70d-11e2-84e7-001a4bcf6878.html
Presently, about 60% — as of the time of this post 7.29 at 10:35 PM EST — respond that they think the answer is “no.” 25% think the answer is “yes,” and 15% are “not sure.”
PRO MED responses would be a nice dataset, where you have people who are more well-read than the man on the street (and may have an advanced degree in health field) but who do not have strong views.
BWPP responses would be a nice dataset for the same reason. (I have now posted the link on BWPP).
For anyone informed about rabbits, I think the percentage would drop to 5% “yes” … only someone trying to stuff 52 rabbits down the hat.
But most people do not have time or motivation to become familiar with the underlying source documents.
With treasure hunting, one can learn who was right where a treasure was — or if there was a treasure at all — when a treasure is found.
Similarly, in the case of Amerithrax, one can find out who is responsible when we learn more about Al Qaeda’s anthrax program through leaks or disclosures relating to interrogations.
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
The only way 52 rabbits can be stuffed down a hat is if superiors wish it to be so. If there were really government accountability, the GAO would seek an answer to why Dr. Ivins work with the rabbits was not mentioned in the investigative report and the documents not produced by the FBI.
Who is responsible for the game of hide-the-ball reflected by the Amerithrax Investigative Summary?
In reviewing the summary, some urged that only a much shorter version be produced — say, 6 pages. Others urged that the full length be produced — warts and all. Were the emails reflecting that debate produced to the GAO? No.
Tthe GAO in on-the-record interviews should have ascertained who knew what, when — and who urged colleagues to go along.
This Wisconsin case is a useful case study where the head of the office told an agent that it would be best for his career if he went along with the government position.
Here, the head of the office was forced out within a few months for cheating on an open book exam on how national security investigations needed to be conducted so as to comply with the law.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/milwaukee-fbi-chief-transferred-under-investigation-b9957741z1-216100811.html
I just got back from NYC where I visited the name of a relative at the 911 memorial — a first responder. There simply is no way that some FBI and DOJ employees are going to be able allowed to play hide-the-ball — and put more lives at risk.
DXer said
The withholding of documents in connection with the Boston marathon bombing is a useful case study bearing on its withholding of documents in Amerithrax. The problem is that DOJ has a fundamental disrespect of the oversight role of Congress.
The “hindsight is 20/20” explanation should only be available when there is straightforward production of the information bearing on the facts — selective disclosure based on conclusory assertions, without more, renders the argument inapt until such disclosure and production of documents. In Amerithrax, there has been a selective disclosure and withholding of key documents relating to key forensics that were far more probative than a genetics analysis that narrowed things regarding the original source from 700-1000 to 200-300.
Indeed, the FBI and DOJ made no mention or production of all of the documents relating to why Dr. Ivins was in the lab those nights in late September and early October 2001.
Frustration rises with FBI on bombings
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/07/13/frustration-rises-with-fbi-bombings/6WOliTRYJf7VcpyFGsTVbP/story.html
By Joan Vennochi | GLOBE COLUMNIST JULY 14, 2013
The Russians say they warned the United States in 2011 that Tamerlan Tsarnaev might be planning to travel to Chechnya to meet with Islamist radicals. The FBI insists the warning was vague, but won’t produce it.
The FBI contends its requests for more information from the Russians went unanswered. Who made them? To whom were they sent? The FBI won’t say, and the Russians told Keating they have no record of such follow-up inquiries.
The FBI interviewed Tamerlan Tsarnaev in the spring and summer of 2011, but concluded he wasn’t a threat. His case was closed and stayed that way — despite, as the Globe reported, more Russian warnings; a CIA decision to add Tsarnaev to a database of potential suspects; and a tip in 2012 from the Department of Homeland Security that he traveled to Russia. The FBI declines to say why it closed the book on the case.
The murders of three Waltham men, whose bodies were discovered on Sept. 12, 2011, provide another possible link to Tamerlan Tsarnaev. A recent New York Times report renewed speculation that the Marathon bombings might never have happened if that murder investigation by local police “had been more vigorous.”
A definite connection between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and the grisly Waltham murders might have been ascertained after the Marathon bombings. But just when Ibragim Todashev was allegedly about to implicate Tsarnaev in the murders, he was killed in May during an FBI interrogation. His death unfolded in a mysterious way that has yet to be officially addressed.
The quest for answers should not evolve into an exercise in blame-shifting between federal and local law enforcement authorities. It should be, as McCaul said, about finding out “what happened, what went wrong, and how to fix it.”
The FBI should not be able to hide behind the veil of ongoing criminal investigation. Indeed, Keating, a former prosecutor, bluntly said he believes the FBI is using the case against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as an excuse to stonewall the Homeland Security Committee.
How often does it happen that Republicans like McCaul and King agree with a Massachusetts Democrat like Keating? For once, these representatives are on the same page — the people’s page.
Count Boston Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis among those who believe the FBI should share more information about potential terror threats with local police departments, and that should be a potent enough mix to shake answers out of the FBI.
But the bureau arrogantly refused to provide a witness for last week’s Homeland Security Committee hearing. Instead, as the Globe reported, the bureau sent a letter saying it would not be responding to all the requests for information.
The FBI closed the case on Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Now they want to close the case on the consequences. They shouldn’t get away with it.
DXer said
“If there is information that comes in about a terrorist threat to a particular city, then local officials should have that information,” Davis said. “There should be a mandate somewhere that the federal authorities have to share that with us so that we can properly defend our community.”
http://www.wbur.org/2013/07/11/bombings-fbi-info-sharing
NYPD Intelligence would be professionally negligent to rely on the FBI’s conclusions in Amerithrax.
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
The lead investigator Ed Montooth appears to have been unaware of the rabbit documents. The entire Ivins Theory was built on a false premise that he had no reason to be in the lab.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/anthrax-files/edward-montooth-the-mandate-was-to-look-at-the-case-with-fresh-eyes/
[interviewer]
What about his records? The calendar that was found in his briefcase showed over that period 20 different experiments — animal experiments — that he was going in and testing, checking for dead animals and whatever. Why was that discounted as being a reason and not to explain why he was in the labs?
[Ed Montooth]
… My recollection of what was on the calendar was there were only a couple times that he went in to check on mice. … When you asked him, “How long does it take you to note what happened?,” it doesn’t come close to explaining why he was in there for the length of period of time he was.
DXer said
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/anthrax-files/edward-montooth-the-mandate-was-to-look-at-the-case-with-fresh-eyes/
[Montooth]
Dr. Ivins had mental problems that date way back before we ever were associated with him. We didn’t drive him to the suicide. …
[interviewer]
How sure are you that you guys got your man?
[Montooth]
I’m very comfortable with Dr. Ivins as the mailer.
[interviewer]
Because?
[Montooth]
Based on the totality of the investigation, the science, the direct evidence, the circumstantial evidence, I’m very comfortable with that.
Comment: Lead investigator Ed Montooth, based on his filmed comments, appears to have been wholly unaware of the documents establishing work with the 52 rabbits. He should have reassessed his conclusion after he read the relevant documents.
DXer said
The woman who knew all about the work with the rabbits but withheld the information was Dr. Patricia Fellows. The DOJ should not have shredded her deposition. If you destroy the best evidence, one is hindered in sorting out the facts.
For example, what if the DOJ had taken the sworn statement of this woman in the Texas case and then shredded it and prevented the GAO from seeing it?
Congress needs to intervene if FBI continues to withhold documents from GAO in connection with its review of the FBI’s conclusions in Amerithrax investigation.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/08/texas-woman-who-told-fbi-her-husband-sent-ricin-tainted-letters-is-arrested/
Texas woman who told FBI her husband sent ricin-tainted letters is arrested
Published June 08, 2013
Associated Press
DXer said
From Greendale, Wisconsin, there is a wonderful Peeps entry called “Do The Greendale Bunny Hop!”
The caption explains
Rachel and Ken’s song and dance. They hold the record for making 52 bunnies disappear!
http://greenfield.patch.com/articles/enter-patchs-easter-peeps-contest-49f4ced5#video-13692905
DXer said
USAMRIID expert Louise Pitt is thanked for reviewing this 2013 manuscript. Dr. Pitt is an example of the highly qualified experts that GAO has available to interview regarding the protocols governing the conduct of animal studies being done by Bruce Ivins and his colleagues in September and October 2001.
Pathology and Pathophysiology of Inhalational Anthrax in a Guinea Pig Model
Click to access IAI.01289-12.full.pdf
Mortality, Clinical Signs, and Body Weights
Of the 37 anthrax-infected animals, sixteen survived to scheduled termination time points, including all animals scheduled to be sacrificed at 24, 30, and 36 hours post-challenge; 3 of 4 animals scheduled to be sacrificed at 48 hours post-challenge, and 1 of 4 animals scheduled to be sacrificed at 72 hours post-challenge (Table 4). The remaining 21 anthrax-infected animals were found dead or euthanized due to moribund condition (Table 4). The time to death for these animals ranged between 46 and 71 hours post-challenge, with a mean of 56 hours. Animals did not show any clinical signs of disease during the first 36 hours after 330 challenge. Within a few hours after the appearance of symptoms, animals either died or reached moribund condition and met the criteria for euthanasia. The clinical manifestations were consistent with inhalational anthrax and similar to those observed in rabbit and NHP models, including labored breathing, cough, lacrimation, weakness, cyanosis, and lethargy. There were no significant changes from the baseline weights for any animal following challenge.
DXer said
Edward Jay Epstein describes the FBI’s “Ivins Theory”
“The FBI turned its attention to Dr. Steven J. Hatfill, a virologist who in 1999 worked at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) in Fort Detrick, which was experimenting with the Ames strain of anthrax. Hatfill showed stress on a polygraph exam, and he had taken the antibiotic Cirpo, which protects against anthrax infection, prior to the attack, and he attracted the attention of a bloodhound trained to react to the anthrax letters. The FBI surveillance agents followed him so closely that one FBI tail car actually ran over his foot. The FBI searched his home, property, girlfriend’s apartment, and workplaces, after the media was alerted. As a result, Hatfill lost his job, consulting contracts, and contact with many associates.” Even isolated, Hatfill did not break under the pressure. Instead, he sued that the FBI had pursued him for five years without a “scintilla of evidence,” leading the Department of Justice to exonerate him and pay him $5.82 million in August 2008.”
I realize Dr. Hatfill forged his PhD diploma. And I realize that Dr. Ivins, like most men, viewed pornography, used screen names, and had crushes on younger, beautiful and accomplished women. And got depressed, for example, when those women did not return his earnest friendship. Indeed, Dr. Ivins admits to have pulled some mean, wholly inappropriate pranks a quarter century ago such as forging a letter to the editor about student hazing and stealing a book from a sorority house.
I defer to the hardworking investigators who viewed those elements as part of a theory of the crime.
Those investigators cannot be faulted if information was kept from them by others.
GAO should ask each investigator what, if any documents, did they not know about in forming their conclusions. For example, did they know about Dr. Ivins’ work with the challenge relating to the 52 rabbits? If not, why not?
Someone played hide-the-ball and the issue is who.
DXer said
Edward Jay Epstein emphasizes dogs rather than rabbits:
“My assessment is that the FBI failed to find the perpetrator of the anthrax attacks. Indeed, it failed twice. Its first wrong man was Dr. Steven J. Hatfill, whose career was ruined by its 24/7 investigation of him; the second wrong man was Dr. Bruce Ivins, who committed suicide under its relentless pressure. In a case such as the anthrax attack, in which the weapon leaves microscopic traces everywhere, the equivalent of Sherlock Holmes’ dog-that-did-not-bark is the conspicuous absence of evidence. The FBI investigation was possibly the most massive in history in terms of expended man-hours. Consider then what evidence the FBI did not find that would have implicated their final suspect, Dr. Ivins.”
DXer said
The case may seem complex but the truth, once understood, seldom is. As to an Ivins Theory, understand that the government’s case was based on a claim of unexplained time in the lab. Now go to the Amerithrax Investigative Summary and take note that the word “rabbits” nowhere appears. Who is responsible for stuffing 52 rabbits down into the hat to make disappear? Why didn’t McClatchy, ProPublica and Frontine ask AUSA Lieber the hard questions? I understand that is difficult to sort through the different rabbit experiments over the months and years. But how hard would it have been to take the early October 2001 email by Bruce reporting on the number of rabbits that had died in the past 3 days and ask Rachel about it on film? The outlets did brilliant and effective work on the lyophilizer issue but have not yet worked the rabbit issue up. I realize they handle countless important stories and their reporters are brilliant and hardworking. But if not them, then it is up to some other top media organization to hit the ball out of the park.
DXer said
There are many experts (both at USAMRIID and elsewhere) who can walk through the details confirmed by the documents relating to the rabbits — and who can address, more generally, what is involved in the uploaded protocols.
see, e.g.,
Infect Immun. 2013 Jan 28. [Epub ahead of print]
Pathology and Pathophysiology of Inhalational Anthrax in a Guinea Pig Model.
Savransky V, Sanford DC, Syar E, Austin JL, Tordoff KP, Anderson MS, Stark GV, Barnewall RE, Briscoe CM, Lemiale-Biérinx L, Park S, Ionin B, Skiadopoulos MH.
Source
Emergent BioSolutions Inc., Gaithersburg, MD.
Abstract
Non-human primates (NHP) and rabbits are the most commonly used animal models for evaluating efficacy of medical countermeasures against anthrax in support of licensure under the FDA’s “Animal Rule.” However, a need for an alternative animal model may arise in certain cases. Development of such an alternative model requires a thorough understanding of the course and manifestation of experimental anthrax disease induced under controlled conditions in the proposed animal species. The guinea pig, which has been used extensively for anthrax pathogenesis studies and anthrax vaccine potency testing, is a good candidate for such alternative model. This study was aimed at determining the median lethal dose (LD(50)) of the Bacillus anthracis Ames strain in guinea pigs and investigating natural history, pathophysiology, and pathology of inhalation anthrax in this animal model following nose-only aerosol exposure. The inhaled LD(50) of aerosolized Ames strain spores in guinea pigs was determined to be 5.0×10(4) spores. Aerosol challenge of guinea pigs resulted in inhalational anthrax with death occurring between 46 and 71 hours post-challenge. The first clinical signs appeared as early as 36 hours post-challenge. Cardiovascular function declined starting at 20 hours post-exposure. Hematogenous dissemination of bacteria was observed microscopically in multiple organs and tissues as early as 24 hours post-challenge. Other histopathologic findings typical of disseminated anthrax infection included suppurative (heterophilic) inflammation, edema, fibrin, necrosis, and/or hemorrhage in the spleen, lungs, and regional lymph nodes, and lymphocyte depletion and/or lymphocytolysis in the spleen and lymph nodes. The study demonstrated that the course of inhalation anthrax disease and the resulting pathology in guinea pigs are similar to those seen in rabbits and NHPs as well as in humans.
Anonymous said
First off the animal checks do take longer than a few minutes even if you are already in the B3 suite not just in USAMRIID; especially if you are required to collect samples. So that time is not absurb. Some of the in and out in short times is close checks when animals are expected to pass and the time checks were for exact as possible times. I know there was a rabbit study going on at that particular weekend because he was doing the time checks for me the weekend in question. We (many at USAMRIID to include myself) have give the information and proof, however it is simply left out. There was no powder made in B3, there was no equipment that could do it. The only place something of that concentration could be made at was out in Dugway. When the powder was reconstituted it matched what was sent prior to 2001 by Dugway but was completely removed from USAMRIID during one of the “visits”.
DXer said
Although the case may seem complex, once stripped of baseless conjecture and factually unsupported claims, the relevant questions are quite simple. Rachel, why didn’t you mention or discuss the work with the 52 rabbits in your Amerithrax Investigative Summary?
Is it that you did not know of it?
DXer said
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/live-pigs-blasted-with-explosives-and-monkeys-infected-with-anthrax-during-cruel-experiments-8352792.html
Live pigs ‘blasted with explosives and monkeys infected with anthrax during cruel experiments’
JOHN VON RADOWITZ MONDAY 26 NOVEMBER 2012
In a further experiment, funded by the US Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), marmosets were infected with anthrax before being treated with an antibiotic, it was alleged. Four animals died and those still alive at the end of the study were killed and dissected, it was claimed.
This study was published in the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents last year. There were no reports of pain relief or other supportive measures and the monkeys must have “suffered immensely” before experiencing a painful death, said the BUAV.
Comment:
The article states:
“Ethical approval
All animal studies were carried out in accordance with the Scientific Procedures Act of 1986 and the Codes of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals used in Scientific Procedures 1989. Work was authorised by a Home Office Project Licence.”
The authors can explain what was involve under those cited procedures. Dr. Norm Covert was on the committee that reviewed the protocols that had to be followed by Dr. Ivins and his colleagues. Quite a lot of good faith, scrupulous effort went into complying with the evolving standards relating to the care (and avoiding suffering) by animals. It is what necessitated the night checks. If AUSA Lieber had understood that there were required night checks and credited Mara Linscott’s statement that it was a one person job that would take a couple of hours — at least disclosed the 302 statement and the documents relating to the rabbit study — then the star of her dog and pony show known as an “Ivins Theory” would have would have met an early and painless demise.
DXer said
GAO: Who at the DOJ and FBI instructed J.P. to pull emails from Batch 35 (produced 8/22/2010) showing what Dr. Ivins was doing in the lab? (such as a 9/26/2001 email 9:57 PM)?
DXer said
In Department of Justice attorney Grafft’s 2012 “Analysis of the Search Warrants of the Amerithrax Investigation,” she writes:
“bullet point one describes the comprehensive seizure of all “laboratory equipment used in the production/replication of biological threat equipment used in the production/replication of biological threat agents, including, but not limited to… live animals.” While such language no doubt prohibited the seizure of the Ivins family dog, if Ivins possessed several mice in his office, such live animals might b e considered a proper seizure under this search warrant directive.”
Do you have any doubt that the DOJ and FBI seized lots of documents relating to Dr. Ivins research with the rabbits — and just failed to disclose them or mention them in their Investigative Summary? At the same time the FBI and DOJ based their case against Dr. Ivins on the claim that he had no reason to be in the lab. Their whole theory was based on a crock and lie.
Who is accountable at the DOJ and FBI? As “Fast and Furious” and 911 demonstrate, no one ever is.