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

* The FBI has listed pages relating to Bruce Ivins that it has deleted and refuses to produce under FOIA with the designation “Referral/Direct”

Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 19, 2016

 

unnamed (27)

 

 

3 Responses to “* The FBI has listed pages relating to Bruce Ivins that it has deleted and refuses to produce under FOIA with the designation “Referral/Direct””

  1. DXer said

    Nearly a month has passed and nothing was done by USAMRIID FOIA to locate these documents.

  2. DXer said

    For starters, USAMRMC FOIA should now provide Notebook 4282 which has Dr. Ivins notations on September 18, 2001, the time of the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings.

  3. DXer said

    Here is where the FBI has listed the pages relating to Bruce Ivins that it has refused to produce under FOIA with the designation “Referral/Direct”. A two page list appears at the end of the Part 29 of the Amerithrax documents in the FBI’s Vault.

    https://vault.fbi.gov/Amerithrax/Amerithrax%20Part%2029%20of%2059

    But it comes to mind because FBI this week is failing to produce documents because it has already produced them.

    (The game played in these contexts is to have the requestor identify the documents being withheld.).

    Okay, FBI. Game on. You can start with Ivins Sep-Oct 2001 emails to Pat and Mara that you have withheld. It doesn’t get more useful as alibi evidence than contemporaneously wriitten emails.

    Moreover, you are withholding Page 39 57, 58, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 94, 85, 101 with the reference “Referral/DIrect”. Isn’t that correct? Doesn’t your own previous production confirm that?

    Someone with influence should ask that the FBI produce the withheld BEI Pages 39 57, 58, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 94, 85, 101.

    Stupid question: What does “Referral/Direct” mean? In the past responses, it meant that the page was being referred to some other agency (the originating agency) that created the document. If that’s the case, what agency would that be? Is it the Army?

    Or does that means there Ivins 302s that were not produced?

    Numerous other pages are suppressed due to exemption b3. (see page above and a second page at the link) Yet b3 requires that they specify the statute requiring nondisclosure.

    https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/oip/legacy/2014/07/23/exemption3_0.pdf

    So it seems that they should identify that statute. Someone with law enforcement experience might know offhand how b3 applies in the case of a pen register.

    Update on request for “Interim Case Management Summary.” The FOIA analyst, a nice former librarian from Virginia, has gone incommunicado.

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: