* USAMRMC FOIA should now provide Notebook 4282 which has Dr. Ivins notations on September 18, 2001, the time of the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings
Posted by DXer on May 19, 2016
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
CASE CLOSED ... what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks? 
DXer said
The notebook was provided by USAMRIID by emails yesterday and today. I want to thank the FOIA Officer very much for the time. She handles many things and FOIA is just one of her responsibilities.
DXer said
Stop the presses. The attachments coming by email Notebook 4282 did not in fact contain the Notebook.
DXer said
Re Ivins/Amerithrax-Notebook 4282
Sandra and Joseph,
Did Medcom inquire of DOJ about Notebook 4282? If Medcom inquired of DOJ, did Medcom get a reply?
The notebook has an entry on the date of the first mailing of anthrax in 2001 that murdered 5 people. I am informed and believe that it also has entries on 9/14/2001 and 9/15/2001, the date that the FBI theorized Ivins prepared the anthrax.
The FBI claims Ivins had no legitimate reason to be in the lab. In contrast, I think the notebook will evidence a virulence study that shows Ivins was responsible for the nighttime and weekend animal checks. (According to lab tech Mara Linscott, such checks were a one-person job and took a couple hours, such as what was observed).
I have suggested instead that an Al Qaeda operative Adnan El-Shukrijumah from Florida was responsible — was the mailer. He was an associate of Mohamed Atta who met with Atta in a Sarasota residence. Adnan told his mother on or about September 11, 2001 that he was coming back into the country. Adnan was staying with Al Qaeda’s #3 KSM. KSM was getting briefed by Al Qaeda’s lab director Yazid Sufaat, who I have interviewed. Sufaat does not deny responsibility for the anthrax mailings and instead pled the Fifth.
The Army and FBI has not treated the issue with the expedition warranted under the FOIPA statute.
Sometimes, as in the case of the Florida Pulse shooter, the FBI closes a case upon lack of evidence when actually the problem is that the evidence was available but not efficiently obtained.
Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
DXer said
It’s now been almost 2 weeks since I made this narrow and highly targeted request relating to the elimination of the (b)(6) redactions on the specified emails.
“USAMRMC FOIA Officer:
__________, Dr. Ivins told a superior that he would not have the Ames that he should have.
If there is someone who knows of a justification for the missing virulent Ames (see produced emails) used to kill 5 people in 2001, doesn’t the public have a right to know?
In balancing the interests, why would it be an unwarranted invasion of privacy? The disclosure, instead, is clearly warranted.
DOJ gives guidance:
Exemption 6 protects information about individuals in “personnel and medical files and similar files” when the
disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy.” …
In order to determine whether Exemption 6 protects against disclosure, an agency
should engage in the following two lines of inquiry: first, determine whether the information
at issue is contained in a personnel, medical, or “similar” file covered by Exemption 6; and, if
so, determine whether disclosure “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy” by balancing the privacy interest that would be compromised by disclosure against
any public interest in the requested information.
The emails at issue have been uploaded here.
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/dxer-says-adnan-el-shukrijumah-son-of-saudi-missionary-was-the-fall-2001-anthrax-mailer-and-fbi-is-withholding-relevant-documents/comment-page-1/#comment-44642
In case you cannot access the web link, the dates and times of the 3 emails are as follows:
(1) December 18, 2006, 9:06 a.m.
(2) December 17, 2006 7::39 a.m.
(3) December 18, 2006 9:14 a.m.
If you, John Peterson or anyone else would further briefing of the applicable precedent, let me know.
It seems an issue that warrants appeal and litigation if necessary given the public interest.”
DXer said
Here are the 3 emails:
DXer said
The wonderful USAMRMC FOIA officer emailed today to say she would look for Notebook 4282. She doesn’t recall that I ever previously asked for it. I am very glad for the work done by Ken, Lew, the graphic artist who helped me for years, and the FOIA officers and other Army personnel hunting and pecking for — and then seeking to present in a fair way — the most relevant evidence dating to 15 years ago. The former lead Amerithrax investigator Lambert appreciates that I am objective and am fully willing to go where the evidence goes.
DXer said
Now if you search “4282” in the FBI’s Vault, you learn that Notebook 4282, IVINS Pages 65 through 70 contain experiments conducted between 8/23/2001 and 09/18/2001,
including the growth of Ba Ames. Given that this was the period that AUSA Lieber claimed Ivins had no reason to be in the B3, the notebook contradicts her claim. It should be produced without further delay. Indeed, it should have been produced many years ago.
The wonderful FOIA officer should call over to her contact that double-checked regarding different notebooks that belatedly were produced, and get this one produced.
DXer said
Dillon already took an appeal. He should just bring suit, having exhausted his administrative remedies, and seek attorneys fees.
The FBI knew full well that it had not returned Notebook 4282 which had entries from the time of the mailings.
The FBI does not provide any contact or recourse other than months and years-long paper pushing — only months or years later to face the same boilerplate stonewalling.
Why did the DOJ and FBI deem it acceptable not to return all of the lab notebooks — when the AUSAs appreciate the importance of the contemporaneous record of events provided by the notebooks?
Posted on December 7, 2011
DXer said
Note that Dr. Dillon’s right to attorneys fees relating to the wrongful withholding of Notebook 4282 extends back to 2016.
DXer said
Can you imagine if my Congressman Katko, a former prosecutor who fearlessly took on local gangs here, took an interest and asked for Notebook 4282 without further delay?
I wrote him yesterday asking his help.
Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com
It seems that the Congressman’s comments at the hearing this week about the importance of safety and effective screening at airports proved (tragically) proved right on the mark.
DXer said
The notebook is listed at page of the 7 page spreadsheet located here:
https://vault.fbi.gov/Amerithrax/amerithrax-part-55-of
In NARA mediation, which is not exclusive of litigation, Dr. Dillon should point the mediator to Notebook 4282 as an example of a document from September 2001 that has not been produced. Dillon is definitely, IMO, entitled to attorneys fees.
DXer said
DXer said
The official “window” used by the FBI for the first mailing is: 5:00 p.m., September 17 through 8 p.m., September 18.
So for the Army and FBI to cull the notebooks — and emails were also culled — from productions is off the charts inexcusable It is very serious.
For example, this email dated September 17, 2001 was culled and then produced only when I specifically identified it.
The game Dave Hardy at the FBI and John Peterson at USAMRMC apparently want me to play is that we have to identify the documents withheld before they are produced.
How about we play this game instead. Produce the documents that have been wrongfully culled and withheld before the sky falls on you.
Upon prompt production, all will be forgiven and we can all have a nice summer and Thanksgiving.
DOJ For 4 Years Withheld This Email (Message 0438) Written By Bruce Ivins On The Date Of Alleged Mailing Of Deadly Anthrax ; GAO Should Obtain A Full Set Of Emails From DOJ, Including Those That DOJ Has Still Failed To Produce
Posted by Lew Weinstein on March 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/doj-for-4-years-withheld-this-email-message-0438-written-by-bruce-ivins-on-the-date-of-alleged-mailing-of-deadly-anthrax-gao-should-obtain-a-full-set-of-emails-from-doj-including-those-that-doj/
DXer said
On September 18, Dr. Ivins arrived for work at 7:03 a.m., and left again at 8:35 a.m.. Page 31 of the FBI’s summary report (page 35 of the pdf file) states that Ivins “traveled with his lab technicians to Covance in Denver, Pennsylvania, to deliver vaccine.”
DXer said
So was the September 18, 2001 entry in the wrongfully withheld Notebook 4282 made between 7:03 a.m. and 8:35 a.m.? Or was it made upon return from Covance in Denver, PA to deliver vaccine.
DXer said
So the anthrax letters were postmarked on September 18, 2001 and the FBI has failed to provide Dr. Bruce Ivins’ notations in his lab notebook made on September 18, 2001. Hmmm…
it seems that the FBI is withholding exculpatory information relating to the murder of 5 people, just like the former lead Amerithrax investigator has claimed to the New York Times and FoxNews.
DXer said
Note that the Army has not produced Bruce Ivins Lab Notebook 4282 with the entry on September 18, 2001.
Nor has the FBI produced a copy of the pages copied by the Agent and in FBI files at 1A GJ 1100.
Here are the only notebooks uploaded by USAMRMC. I have emailed the wonderful USAMRMC FOIA Officer to ask that Notebook 4282 now be located and uploaded.
LabNotebook 3716(redacted).pdf (18811 KB) — Posted: 08/24/2012
LabNotebook4103(redacted).pdf (107678 KB) — Posted: 06/02/2011
LabNotebook3919(redacted).pdf (2993 KB) — Posted: 05/10/2011
LabNotebook4000(redacted).pdf (155721 KB) — Posted: 06/21/2011
LabNotebook3745(redacted).pdf (32444 KB) — Posted: 06/02/2011
LabNotebook4237(redacted).pdf (16714 KB) — Posted: 06/02/2011
LabNotebook 4240(redacted).pdf (7698 KB) — Posted: 08/24/2012
LabNotebook 4241_B01-11(redacted).pdf (6173 KB) — Posted: 08/24/2012
LabNotebook3921(redacted).pdf (22150 KB) — Posted: 06/02/2011
LabNotebook4281(redacted).pdf (6568 KB) — Posted: 05/13/2011
LabNotebook4306(redacted).pdf (4286 KB) — Posted: 05/03/2011
LabNotebook4383(redacted).pdf (28822 KB) — Posted: 04/29/2011
LabNotebook 3655 redacted.pdf (19003 KB) — Posted: 04/28/2016
Lab Notebook 3945 redacted.pdf (12176 KB) — Posted: 04/28/2016
• Notes and Sample Anaylsis from Notebook 3268.pdf (19684 KB) — Posted: 01/05/2012