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

* DXer has sent his tip to “Information Resources Center Hotline” set up as part of DOD Laboratory Review

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 10, 2015

unnamed1010

Information Resources  Center Hotline/

Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Information Resource Center

Dear Sir or Madam:

The DOD Laboratory Review website  [ http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/DoD-Laboratory-Review  ] states:“In support of the coordination and rapid response to the DoD’s comprehensive review of this matter, a 24-hour a day, seven days a week hotline has been established. Public inquiries and questions regarding the DoD’s review of laboratory procedures can be directed to the Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear Information Resource Center.”

I am writing to set forth my concerns about the irradiation of 340 ml. of virulent, Dugway-made b. anthracis Ames that has been overlooked in the DOD Laboratory Review.  The irradiation was scheduled to be done at USAMRIID.

Dugway shipped of 160 ml. b. anthracis Ames and 180 ml. b. anthracis Ames for irradiation on June 27, 2001.  (The total was 340 ml.)

Documentary source:
 Dugway shipped 175 ml Ames spores for irradiation on August 30, 2000 and 340 ml Ames spores for irradiation on Jun 27, 2001
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 5, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/05/dugway-shipped-175-ml-ames-spores-for-irradiation-on-august-30-2000-and-340-ml-ames-spores-for-irradiation-on-jun-27-2001/
Based on a 2004 FBI report,  I believe that irradiation was unsuccessful.  Documentary source:
* In 2004, the FBI was told that Ivins handled irradiation of Dugway spores, which then were kept in the cold room near the loading dock even though irradiation was not always successful
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 4, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/04/in-2004-the-fbi-was-told-that-ivins-handled-irradiation-of-dugway-spores-which-then-were-kept-in-the-cold-room-even-though-irradiation-was-not-always-successful/Flask 1030 was also the seed stock of Flask 1029 —the “Dugway Ames”.  
The “Dugway Ames” (from Flask 1029) was alleged by the DOJ to be the origin of the “murder weapon” in the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings that killed five people.

Documentary source:
Was the 340 ml. of Ames anthrax sent on June 27, 2001 from Dugway to USAMRIID for irradiation the anthrax that reportedly went missing?  Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 6, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/06/was-the-340-ml-of-ames-anthrax-sent-on-june-27-2001-from-dugway-to-usamriid-for-irradiation-the-anthrax-that-reportedly-went-missing/
Was the 340 ml. of genetically matching virulent Ames shipped from Dugway to USAMRIID in June 2001 tested for the genetically distinctive subtilis contaminant — Or did it go missing?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 9, 2015
 Ivins calculated that it would take 300 ml of Dugway spores to make the mailed anthrax – he said that amount of spores would be noticed if it went missing.
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 7, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/ivins-calculated-that-it-would-take-300-ml-of-dugway-spores-to-make-the-mailed-anthrax-he-said-that-amount-of-spores-would-be-noticed-if-it-went-missing/

Specifically, I am concerned that Dr. Christian Hassell and Dr. Vahid Majidi, who guided the FBI Amerithrax investigation, have now guided the DOD review and that analysis did not extend to the pre-911 shipment of the 340 ml. of Ames to USAMRIID that I suggest was genetically matching the anthrax used to murder five people and terrorize a nation.  (Flask 1030 had 3 morphs and then went through additional passaging at Dugway).An attorney, I am concerned that the Army and FBI have wrongfully failed to produce Notebook 3655 pursuant to my FOIA requests.  I expect to bring litigation over the wrongful withholding.  Both the DOD (to include JAG) and the FBI, I submit, are playing “hide-the-ball.”I ask that the shipment be addressed by the DOD.  If there is to be transparency and accountability, Bruce Ivins’ Notebook 3655 (relating to Ivins’ Flask 1030) and Notebook 4010 (relating to Ivins’ Flask 1029) should be uploaded to the excellent USMRMC Electronic Website along with the numerous other Bruce Ivins’ notebooks.

If they are not produced, i expect it to be shown that DOD — acting through former Amerithrax officials Dr. Christian Hassell and Dr. Vahid Majidi — will have turned the claim of transparency and accountability into a mere public relations slogan.

Documentary source:
Who told Ivins on December 17, 2006 not to tell anyone about missing samples — that the FBI situation was under control — and that “justification” for missing samples could be provided if necessary?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 7, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/07/who-told-ivins-on-december-17-2006-not-to-tell-anyone-about-missing-samples-that-the-fbi-situation-was-under-control-and-that-justification-for-missing-samples-could-be-provided/

Christian Hassell never provided NAS the Notebook 3655, which related to Flask 1030 — the seed stock sent to Dugway to make both Flask 1029 and the 340 ml. Ames then sent to USAMRIID in June 2001
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/christian-hassell-never-provided-nas-the-notebook-3655-which-related-to-flask-1030-and-was-the-seed-stock-sent-to-dugway-to-make-both-flask-1029-and-the-340-ml-ames-then-sent-to-usamriid-in-june/
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 9, 2015

Very truly yours,
Advertisements

12 Responses to “* DXer has sent his tip to “Information Resources Center Hotline” set up as part of DOD Laboratory Review”

  1. DXer said

    Judge Chides FBI for Cautious FOIA Handling
    Courthouse News Service-1 hour ago
    WASHINGTON (CN) – The FBI improperly withheld all records that would show how it responds to Freedom of Information Act requests, …

    Joining those groups as plaintiffs were investigative Jeffrey Stein and Ryan Shapiro, who is studying FOIA and Privacy Act theory for his doctorate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    Summarizing the case at issue as one “about how the FBI applies FOIA to FOIA,” U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss said the exemption the FBI invoked here covers records compiled for law-enforcement purposes.
    It said records related to past FOIA cases would risk “the implicit disclosure of highly sensitive information relating to ongoing investigations, confidential informants and classified national security matters,” as paraphrased Friday by Judge Moss.
    The FBI also invoked an invasion-of-privacy exception it said covers records tracking the performance of FBI personnel.
    A court battle over the requests has been brewing for over three years, and Judge Moss granted each side partial summary judgment last week in a 63-page decision.
    In rejecting the government’s reliance on the “possible presence” of harm, Moss pointed to recent Supreme Court precedent warning “against permitting even substantial policy considerations to trump the plain language of the FOIA.”
    http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/01/28/judge-chides-fbi-for-cautious-foia-handling.htm

  2. DXer said

    Dr. Ebright,

    The former lead Amerithrax investigator Richard L. Lambert has sued in federal district court and in an interview on FoxNews publicly claimed that the FBI is intentionally concealing information that is exculpatory of USAMRIID scientist Bruce Ivins.

    (The media did not notice but none of the traditional forensic reports, for example, were produced).

    These documents include a 2000 or so page Interim Major Case Summary written by my friend Rick Lambert.

    I’ll widely distribute the estimated 3500 pages (obtained due to Dillon’s superb efforts) promptly.

    Although your focus has been on policy and the proliferation of labs, I wanted to keep you in the loop because there is an interplay.

    The DOD has only addressed the issues of your interest post-2002 so far.

    These 3500 or whatever pages will take things back prior to that — to the pre-2002 period.

    To include access to Ames strain at places like Dugway and USAMRIID and Aberdeen.

    http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com

  3. DXer said

    USAMRIID reports today that it cannot locate any documents confirming that the 340 ml. of virulent Ames was ever irradiated or where it was shipped.

  4. DXer said

    The 340 ml. spores were NEVER irradiated. Were they? Weren’t they, in fact, ordered by Bruce Ivins and a colleague? Didn’t they cost $30,000? And didn’t he provide the four vials for seed stock for their production?

    Weren’t the spores then produced by Dugway and shipped to Bruce Ivins and a colleague on June 27, 2001? Again, they weren’t ever radiated, were they? So where did the spores go?

    Whose signature is that on SCOPE OF WORK – Bacillus anthracis “AMES SPORES — With the title “Chief, Research Plans and Programs” on May 21, 2001.

    Can he or she tell us where the 340 ml. Ames spores made by Dugway from the 4 vials of seed stock supplied by Bruce Ivins went?

    The 340 ml. of Dugway grown Ames likely would be genetically matching the anthrax used in the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings and so it seems important to locate what happened to them — that is, how they were used.

    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Ames spores Sunday, May 06, 2001 4:33:32 PM
    (b) (6)
    (b) (6)
    I believed that you handled the contract with Dugway a few years ago, when we had them produce several lots of Ames spores for us. Do you still have the contract, or do you know who would have it. It would be very helpful to refer to it, because we will soon be needing more Ames spores to replace those which we have been using. Another contract with Dugway would provide us with those spores.
    Thanks for the information. I hope you have the contract or can get a copy of it. – Bruce

    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Spore contract with Dugway Monday, May 07, 2001 12:48:23 PM
    (b) (6)
    (b) (6)
    Do you have a copy of a contract between us and Dugway, about 1996 or 1997, in which they made several lots of Bacillus anthracis Ames spores for us? I think we paid them about $50,000, but I’m not sure. Anyway, if you could find it and I could have a copy of it, it would be great. We are in need of more spores and they could make them. If there is something to pattern a new agreement after, it would be very helpful. Thanks!
    – Bruce

    Monday, May 07, 2001 7:16 PM To: Ivins (E-mail) Subject: spores
    Bruce, Got your callback too late in the day to get back with you. On the
    paperwork for the spore production: I will FAX some documents that I have located tomorrow for your use in putting together the appropriate request. My boss says let’s (DPG) go ahead with the production when you’re ready. So it looks good from this end if and when you’re good to go.

    Hi,
    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Ames spore – production Tuesday, May 08, 2001 2:51:49 PM
    (b) (6)
    (b)
    (6)Thanks again for your information that you faxed to me. I’m going to start rewriting a new statement of work based on the old one. I’ll forward it to you and your people for their comments, additions, price, etc.
    – Bruce

    Hi,
    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Contract Tuesday, May 08, 2001 10:56:06 AM
    (b) (6)
    (b)
    (6)I received your FAX. Thanks! Perhaps you could talk to the appropriate people there and ask if the agreement (Contract? CREDA?) would be acceptable as written, with whatever increase in funds is deemed appropriate. I’ll take this to the contract people here and get started.
    Hope you have had a nice spring. – Bruce

    Hi,
    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Ames spore – production Tuesday, May 08, 2001 2:51:49 PM
    (b) (6)
    (b)
    (6)Thanks again for your information that you faxed to me. I’m going to start rewriting a new statement of work based on the old one. I’ll forward it to you and your people for their comments, additions, price, etc.
    – Bruce

    :
    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    Spores Monday, May 21, 2001 3:57:39 PM
    (b) (6)
    (b) (6)
    (b)
    Hi, Enclosed is a statement of work for Ames spore production based on the one you sent me recently, which was used in 1997. Could you please look it over, then have whoever there needs to go over it do so? Of course, the dollar amount will have gone up, and if there are other changes, please make them. Then if you could send it back to me, I’ll turn it over to who will probably go ahead and OK it as is, since it’s based on the previously approved one.
    Thanks, and hope you’re having a great spring! – Bruce

    [In a subsequent email Dugway corresondent asked if the December 2002 was a mistake — given that Dugway would be able to complete the spores in 2001.]

    Weren’t the spores then produced by Dugway and shipped to Bruce Ivins and a colleague on June 27, 2001? If they were, they weren’t ever radiated, were they?

    • DXer said

      I’m now skeptical or at least uncertain that the June 27, 2001 relates to the Dugway-USAMRIID, 21 May 2001 Statement of Work. My present skepticism is due to June 25, 2001 emails where Ivins was hoping to get Dugway paid so they could start work. I just don’t know yet.

      I saw BRIDGE OF SPIES tonight when I should have been figuring out the Statement of Work for Dugway Ames spores that USAMRMC produced today. I recommend the movie. I expect more documents to be produced tomorrow. The wonderful USAMRMC officer is going to encourage those who were tasked with looking for documents to look harder.

  5. DXer said

    Dr. Ebright, who has been a learned and influential commentator throughout, writes today:

    “It seems clear that the irradiation failures were well known to DoD. It also seems clear that irradiation failures mean that the pre-2001 distribution of Ames was wider than previously documented.”

  6. DXer said

    The Battelle High Temperature Incendiary Project utilized the Vollum strain of Ba. But, truth be told, did it also include Ames?

    Spores from this project were acetone dried. I believe the method was taught to someone at Dugway by William Patrick in 1998.

    A witness identified a picture labeled #72-74 as the container within the can which contained the four (4) vials of seed stock originally sent by IVINS in 1997. (The seed stock was from Ivins’ Flask 1030.)

    Contamination would sometimes occur — to include subtilis contamination. Bg contamination of the 1997 Dugway-USAMRIID batches occurred under different circumstances — environmental contamination of the count plates, post fermentation (deemed suitable to send on to USAMRIID), or contamination within the fermentation (deemed not suitable to send on to to USAMRIID). Unsuitable fermentation runs were destroyed by autoclaving. In 2003, there was Bacillus subtilis contamination.

    So if I were an insider with access looking to bear down on things, I would turn to the Battelle High Temperature Incendiary Project, its use of Ames rather than just Vollum, and compare the genetic distinctiveness of the subtilis contamination in 2003 beads made for Ivins with the subtilis contamination in the mailed anthrax.

    The acetone method of drying, I believe, is classified but all this science is over my head.

    Source:

    279A-WF-222036-DUGWAY
    https://vault.fbi.gov/Amerithrax/amerithrax-part-40-of

    • DXer said

      You may recall the Battelle High Temperature Incendiary Project as related to the DTRA, Navy, Lockheed Martin VULCAN FIRE classified biodefense project.

      “The DTRA and Office of Naval Research programme with industry partner Lockheed Martin will seek to destroy CW/BW agents in situ. It uses a high-temperature incendiary (HTI) “thermo-corrosive” filling adapted from Special Operations Command’s classified ‘Vulcan Fire’ programme.”

      Time out of for a message from our sponsor:

      Ali Al-Timimi worked on a classified project for the Navy while at SRA in 1999. That was when Charles Bailey, his future suitemate at the DARPA [DTRA]-funded Center for Biodefense was working in 1999. Ali’s gracious wife, Ziyana, said (without consent of counsel) she could not tell me what Ali was working on for the Navy. Was and he and Dr. Bailey working on a Vulcan Fire-related program? (As I recall, there were classified biodefense experiments involving ships in Spring 2001, for example.)

      Ali Al-Timimi had previously worked for Andrew Card, the White House Chief of Staff, as an assistant at DOT, according to his original defense committee. It would have been pretty bad for the Bush Administration if 340 ml. of Ames from the Battelle High Temperature Incendiary program turned up missing. FBI Director Mueller reported each day to Bush on Amerithrax — and Andrew Card opened the door for the Director.

      It sort of would explain, though, why things unfolded the way they did.

      USA Expedites Chem-Bio Bunker-Buster Project
      Jane’s Defence Weekly | September 18, 2002 | Andrew Koch
      Posted on September 16, 2002 5:10:14 PM EDT by Stand Watch Listen

      The US armed forces have long sought a capability to locate and destroy stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons (CW and BW) such as Iraq is believed to possess.

      However, despite years of development efforts, US defence officials say the task still poses serious technical and operational challenges. “There is no silver bullet for the defeat of a chemical or biological weapon,” explained Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) director Stephen Younger. “Kilogramme quantities I think we are getting reasonably close to being able to deal with. Hundreds of kilogrammes to tons, which exist in some places – that is a more difficult problem.”

      Paramount among these concerns is finding a way of destroying the agents without releasing them into the atmosphere – a problem complicated when they are stored or hidden underground and in populated urban areas, as is the case with Iraq.

      No existing fielded weapon, however, would destroy lethal agents that have already been produced. That task would be left to a special filling the US Department of Defense has been developing over several years under the category of ‘Agent Defeat’. And while, as Younger explained, no single method has proven effective against all types of agents, work on the Agent Defeat Phase II advanced concept technology demonstration (ACTD) programme holds promise.

      The DTRA and Office of Naval Research programme with industry partner Lockheed Martin will seek to destroy CW/BW agents in situ. It uses a high-temperature incendiary (HTI) “thermo-corrosive” filling adapted from Special Operations Command’s classified ‘Vulcan Fire’ programme.

      The concept involves 300 lb (136kg) of a two-stage reactive and pelletised mix of “titanium boron lithium perchlorate intermetallic high-temperature fill” that burns at 1,000ºF (538ºC) for a long time and with low overpressure so any remnants are not ejected from the facility. As a by-product of the HTI reaction, 35 lb (15.8kg) of disinfecting monatomic chlorine and monatomic fluorine gas, along with hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acid, will be left to destroy any remaining BW agents.

      The goal is to develop the fill for both the 2,000 lb BLU-116 penetrating warhead on the GBU-24 laser-guided bomb, and the 2,000 lb BLU-109 penetrator on a Joint Direct Attack Munition.

      The goals of the ATCD are to fabricate eight weapons by Fiscal Year 2004 (FY04) for flight-tests and validation and an additional 20 to leave for operational use. As the US-led Operation ‘Enduring Freedom’ in Afghanistan demonstrated, promising technologies such as ACTDs can be accelerated when there is a vital operational need.

      The ability to destroy these in situ, according to some documents and several US defence and industry officials, may now be possible.

      In addition to traditional demolition capabilities offered by introducing special forces on the ground, US defence and industry officials note new technologies such as a single-shot high-powered microwave (HPM) weapon could be ready. HPM weapons could be used to destroy CW/BW agent production equipment by burning-out electronic and computerised controls. Likewise, computer network attacks could shutdown key infrastructures, such as the production equipment, or cut off electricity. Other means to incapacitate the facility or temporarily deny access to the material are offered by substances such as sticky or hardening foams.

      According to US intelligence and former UN Special Commission officials, Iraq is hiding CW agents such as VX nerve gas, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard, and has produced and weaponised biological agents such as anthrax and botulinum toxin. Further, the officials fear, Baghdad could be developing deadly germ bombs of highly contagious diseases such as smallpox.

    • DXer said

      Perhaps the acetone method of drying is just proprietary rather than classified. Bill Patrick certainly seemed proud of it. I believe it was contained in the black notebooks kept on his living room shelf.

      In the 2003-2006 attempt to reproduced the mailed spores for the FBI, as one of the alternative drying methods, the report stated:

      “The portion to be acetone dried will be processed according to the draft standing operating procedure (SOP), Acetone Drying Procedures for BA Spores.

      The point of contact for the 2003 study by the Dugway scientists to reproduce the mailed anthrax was Dr. Dan Martin.

      Even in that study, Dugways irradiation was sometimes ineffective. See, e.g., B1M13 (page 77 of 255) in materials FBI supplied NAS.

      Like its Hatfill Theory, the Ivins Theory seems much more reasonable than critics give the FBI credit. In fact, today, I feel like hugging an FBI Agent.

      Reasonable people can disagree — and it helps to permit people to “get on the same page” consistent with national security and privacy interests.

      I recommend that the FBI expedite Ken Dillon’s pending requests, don’t charge him for search or processing time, and make whatever redactions are necessary to satisfy privacy and national security interests. Most of all, provide me Notebook 3655 and another notebook or two that the FBI and the Army has inappropriately failed to produce. Provide all of Notebook 4010 consistent with FOIA.

      FOIA/PA has a procedure for redacting material that should not be disclosed under the statutory framework.

      “Hide-the-ball” and “the dog ate your request” are not permitted statutory exemptions.

      So let’s get a move-on. The Dugway accountability report is expected out before Secretary of Army McHugh leaves this next month.

      • DXer said

        Clarification –

        Note that Amerithrax irradiation failure related to Dugway spores taken to USAMRIID for irradiation.

        October 3, 2003 AMERITHRAX FORENSIC UPDATE,
        B3D1 (page 141 of 271)

        “SA ____________ continues to work at Dugway where he is attempting to replicate the culture, harvest and drying methods which were potentially used by the suspect. Gram quantities of Anthrax spores have been produced. The yield of clean spores is less than was earlier expected. After the harvesting, drying and milling processes are completed, the Dugway spores will be carried by Bu-plane to USAMRIID for radiation. These spores will then be examined in several of the test systems at other laboratories.”

  7. DXer said

    Who Was The Only Person In [Redacted] Spoke To About The Dried Aerosol Project? Was It Ivins Assistant, The Aerosol Expert Pat F.? It Was Not Ivins Because His Name Would Not Have Been Redacted.
    Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 11, 2012
    https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/11/who-was-the-only-person-in-redacted-spoke-to-about-the-dried-aerosol-project-was-it-ivins-assistant-the-aerosol-expert-pat-f-it-was-not-ivins-because-his-name-would-not-have-been-redacted/

    Is Southern Research Institute the phrase that fits in front of laboratory in regard to the location that aerosol work for DARPA was done? Was it Johns-Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory? Or instead were the special facilities built at USAMRIID. The research involved the FBI’s anthrax expert John Ezzell and his assistant Joany Jackman.
    Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 21, 2011
    https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/07/21/is-southern-research-institute-the-phrase-that-fits-in-front-of-laboratory-in-regard-to-the-location-that-aerosol-work-for-darpa-was-done-or-was-it-johns-hopkins-university-applied-physics-labora/

    More on dried aerosol project: Was it Southern Research Institute that was considered for the contract? Who thought he was above the investigation?
    Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 19, 2011
    https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/more-on-dried-aerosol-project-was-it-southern-research-institute-that-was-considered-for-the-contract-who-thought-he-was-above-the-investigation/

    when did Southern Research Institute (SRI) first obtain virulent Ames and from whom?
    Posted on April 6, 2010
    https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/when-did-southern-research-institute-first-obtain-virulent-ames-and-from-whom/

  8. DXer said

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: