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

* The FBI should return a copy of Notebook 4010, relating to Flask 1029, the so-called “murder weapon”, to USAMRIID so that it may be uploaded as required by FOIA

Posted by DXer on December 12, 2017

DXer emailed a request (12-11-17) to FBI’s Kris Weart, an FBI FOIA analyst, asking:

Isn’t it about time that the FBI return Lab Notebook 4010 to USAMRIID — a complete copy — to USAMRIID for uploading along with Ivins’ other notebooks?  It relates to Flask 1029, the so-called “murder weapon”.  No exemptions apply except for the occasional (b)(6) redaction of a proper name.  USAMRIID is the originating agency and so it is the USAMRMC FOIA officer who is charged with making any necessary redactions.  USAMRMC made a formal request that all Ivins notebooks be returned long ago.  The notebooks are all contained on a CD that was obtained by the FBI.   The notebooks had been scanned by a contractor.

40 Responses to “* The FBI should return a copy of Notebook 4010, relating to Flask 1029, the so-called “murder weapon”, to USAMRIID so that it may be uploaded as required by FOIA”

  1. DXer said


    The treasure hunters should be allowed to pay for processing of the 2,400 pages The story does not mention whether they have offered. (I don’t doubt that they have). (Their motive is a profit motive rather than the public interest as such).

    It’s an interesting story but we need to step back and appreciate that the FBI is overwhelmed with FOIA requests and the public interest lies with families who have lost loved ones etc

    Hensley: Union gold, treasure hunters and going round and round with the FBI

    It’s a story that has all the makings of an Indiana Jones movie – fabled and mysterious treasure, tantalizing clues, odd twists and turns.

    And a government agency that appears to have been less than forthcoming for almost four years.

    At least, that’s the takeaway here after reading about the travails of Dennis and Kem Parada, a father-son duo who own the treasure-hunting company Finders Keepers.

    Some backstory first. Legend has it that an 1863 shipment of Union gold somehow vanished on the way to the U.S. Mint in Philadelphia. Whether it was lost or stolen remains undetermined. Likewise the exact amount or other specifics, but the story went that the gold was hidden on what is now state-owned land in Pennsylvania.

    This is where Finders Keepers gets involved. The Paradas apparently invested a lot of time trying to locate the cache of gold, and their metal-detecting equipment indicated something huge was buried in an area about 130 miles northeast of Pittsburgh.

    This is where the FBI gets involved. For whatever reason, the Paradas met with the FBI, which, according to an Associated Press report, brought in an outside contractor whose more sophisticated equipment indicated something large was buried underground. How large? The mass purportedly weighed nine tons and had the density of gold.

    Doesn’t mean it was gold, only could have been gold. Could have been something else.

    In March 2018, the FBI’s shovels went to work. The Paradas were allowed to go, but they were kept in their car and not allowed to watch what happened. When it was over, the FBI said nothing to see here and escorted the Paradas to a large, empty hole to back up their claim.

    Suffice it to say, the Paradas weren’t buying what the FBI was selling. In the years since, Finders Keepers and its representatives have busied themselves with trying to learn what the FBI found that day. Meanwhile, the FBI, according to the Paradas, has been completely unhelpful. In fact, the agency has repeatedly refused to answer one simple question: Did you find any gold?

    The back and forth continued recently with Finders Keepers filing a federal lawsuit against the Justice Department because its has repeatedly failed to produce documents about the FBI’s search. “There’s been a pattern of behavior by the FBI that’s been very troubling,” Anne Weismann, who represents Finders Keepers, said in an AP story. She also questioned whether the FBI is “acting in good faith.”

    Say it ain’t so.

    According to previous AP reports on the matter, the FBI at first claimed to have no files about its investigation into the gold’s existence. The Justice Department responded by ordering the agency to look harder. The FBI then said the records were exempt from public disclosure.

    At last, the FBI said it had now somehow discovered 2,400 pages of records and 17 video files that “could” be turned over, although it would take “years” for that to happen,” per the AP.

    And we wonder why people are skeptical of government agencies. There is only a little discrepancy between zero files and 2,400 pages. It would be exceedingly difficult to accidentally overlook that sizable raft of information.

    As of early January, the case remains in legal limbo. According to the AP, Finders Keepers asked the Justice Department for expedited processing, something within the department’s power in cases of “widespread media interest involving questions about government integrity.” Although that seems to apply in this instance, the DOJ denied the request.

    Obviously, we don’t know everything about this case, but it makes one wonder why the FBI would withhold this information. The Paradas are convinced the gold was found and spirited away by the government. Nearby residents claim to have heard excavation work going on in the overnight hours of early March 2018. They also say they saw FBI vehicles and armored trucks leaving the area. The most forthcoming the FBI has been about its work is saying evidence suggested the location might have had significance as a “cultural heritage site,” according to the AP.

    Let’s speculate for a few moments. A simple yes or no probably would not be so simple. First, say the gold exists. If it were of the mass suggested by the metal-detecting equipment, its value could be hundreds of millions of dollars. That’s a lot of money, and where there is lots of money, there is usually lots of greed.

    Federal authorities believe it is their gold, but Finders Keepers contends it has a legitimate claim to the treasure. After all, it invested time, effort and money, making hundreds of trips to the area, locating it and might have recovered the treasure were it not for involving the federal government.

    Which begs the next question. If the gold exists and is on state-owned land, wouldn’t Pennsylvania have a strong claim? In a previous AP story on this tug-of-war, the state’s interest was a concern for the FBI, according to an unsealed affidavit last June. A member of the FBI’s art crime team in Philadelphia said he had probable cause to believe “one or more tons” of gold was hidden there and Pennsylvania might claim the gold as “abandoned property,” which, the FBI believed, would set the stage for a protracted and expensive legal fight.

    One thing for sure. This story isn’t going away. Finders Keepers will keep the pressure on until it has all of the records or a definitive answer. Considering the resources of the federal government, it could be a long, long time before either happens.

    In the meantime, I keep thinking back to the first Indiana Jones movie, “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” You may remember all the speculation around whether the Ark of the Covenant truly existed (speculation continues today), but Jones recovered it just in time for the government to take possession, put it in a nondescript crate and pack it away in some obscure corner of some faraway warehouse.

  2. DXer said

    The fictionalized National Geographic tv show has chosen to make up facts about Bruce Ivins. If they were going to make up facts, they should not have used his name. If you want to see when the sample for Flask 1029 was submitted, just ask the FBI to cough up Notebook 4010.

  3. DXer said

    Mark Kortepeter writes in his new book:

    “There are only three awards currently in the display case. The one defiantly at dead center is a medal and certificate for “Exceptional Civilian Service” to the government. The name on the award: Bruce Ivins.”

  4. DXer said

    Former USAMRIID scientist reflects on time at Fort Detrick in new book
    • By Heather Mongilio

    • Feb 13, 2020

    Kortepeter does address the controversy with Bruce Ivins, a microbiologist suspected of being the perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks. Ivins died by suicide before a trial, and some of his colleagues still question if he was behind the attacks.

    He does not say whether he believes Ivins was guilty or not in his writing, he said.

    “But I felt like I wanted to show a different side of the story, how some of the folks at USAMRIID felt about it,” Kortepeter said. “And really to demonstrate a little bit about the devastation that had on the, on the institute as a whole, not just to Dr. Ivins, and allow some of my colleagues who work with them to have a bit of a voice that they really weren’t able to have, because they were under gag orders by the FBI.”


    I’ve enjoyed binge-watching “Law and Order”/SVU and NCIS with an elderly relative. But even though watching TV involves less work, I think reading an insider’s account of life at Ft. Detrick would be a lot of fun. I’m a frugal guy but I’m going to order it today. Ask your favorite librarian to order it for you.

  5. DXer said


    On January 17, 2019, this Court addressed the parties’ first round of summary judgment briefings in this Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) suit. Dillon v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, No. 17-1716 (RC), 2019 WL 249580 (D.D.C. Jan. 17, 2019). Therein, the Court discussed Plaintiff Kenneth Dillon’s second FOIA request for Interim Major Case Summary (“IMCS”) excerpts, which Defendant withheld in full pursuant to a claim of deliberative process privilege. See id. at *7–9. To assess the FBI’s assertion that the entirety of the IMCS report is deliberative, the Court directed the FBI to produce the 38 withheld pages for the Court’s in camera review. Id. at *8–9. Defendant responded by notifying the Court that the IMCS records contain classified information, Def.’s Notice ¶ 1, ECF No. 32, and thereafter provided the classified material for the Court’s review. The Court’s in camera review of the 38 pages of ICMS excerpts indicates that only a small portion of the material produced is classified. Thus, the Court directs Defendant to provide the Court with a redacted version of the material (with classified information excised), including specification of which FOIA exemption(s) are claimed with respect to which portions of the Case 1:17-cv-01716-RC Document 48 Filed 02/05/20 Page 1 of 2 2 document, that is suitable for in camera review by a law clerk who does not possess any level of security clearance. It is hereby ORDERED that, within two weeks, Defendant shall produce such a redacted version of the 38 pages of ICMS excerpts. SO ORDERED. Dated: February 5, 2020 RUDOLPH CONTRERAS United States District Judge

  6. DXer said

    2020-02-05 48 ORDER directing Defendant to produce redacted version of Interim Major Case Summary excerpts. See document for details. Signed by Judge Rudolph Contreras on February 5, 2020. (lcrc3) (Entered: 02/05/2020)

    • DXer said

      A January 2019 opinion provides some background of this week’s order. (Forgive any formatting errors I’ve introduced and go to the text of that January 2019 opinion for its precise content).

      District District of Columbia
      City Washington, DC
      Case Number 1:2017cv01716
      Date Filed 2017-08-23
      Date Closed Open
      Judge Judge Rudolph Contreras
      Plaintiff KENNETH J. DILLON

      Case Description Kenneth Dillon, a historian, submitted a FOIA request to the FBI for records concerning its investigation of letters containing anthrax. Dillon requested an “Interim Major Case Summary” written in 2006 by Richard Lambert. The agency told Dillon that the report was already available in its online reading room. Dillon filed an administrative appeal with the Office of Information Policy, arguing that the report was not available online. OIP remanded the request back to the FBI for a further search. Dillon narrowed his request to records concerning the FBI’s investigation of Bruce Irvins. He also submitted a second request for emails concerning Irvins. After hearing nothing further from the agency, Dillon filed suit.
      Complaint issues: Failure to respond within statutory time limit, Adequacy – Search, Litigation – Attorney’s fees

      FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Rudolph Contreras has ruled that the FBI has not yet shown that it conducted an adequate search for emails that were part of its investigation of the 2001 mailing of anthrax spores to the offices of Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD), as well as news organizations in New York and Florida, which resulted in the deaths of five people, and that to assess the agency’s claim that an interim report prepared four years before the agency concluded its investigation is protected by the deliberative process privilege under Exemption 5 (privileges) Contreras will need to conduct an in camera review of 38 pages.

      After a years-long investigation, the FBI concluded that Dr. Bruce Ivins, a scientist at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, had been responsible for the attacks. But before Ivins could be indicted, he committed suicide. The FBI formally closed its investigation without charging anyone and issued a 96-page Investigative Summary outlining its findings. Historian and researcher Kenneth Dillon, who was skeptical that Ivins had been involved at all, submitted two FOIA requests to the FBI. The first request was for evidence that Dillon believed was in the FBI’s possession particularly emails Ivins sent or received and certain notebooks belonging to Ivins. The second request asked for 38 pages from the FBI’s Interim Major Case Summary, a 2,000-page report produced in 2006, four years before it concluded its investigation. Dillon asked for the 22- page table of contents and the 16 pages that discussed Ivins. In response to Dillon’s first request, the agency disclosed seven pages of emails and 98 pages of notebook material. In response to Dillon’s second request, the agency claimed the entire 2000-page report was protected by the deliberative process privilege. Dillon challenged the adequacy of the agency’s search for his first request, focusing on the fact that there were other emails Dillon believed had been sent to Mara Linscott, Ivins’ assistant, identified during the investigation that had not been produced. Contreras mentioned several reasons why the emails might not have been located. He pointed out that “it is thus possible that Dillon is mistaken in believing that Linscott was the recipient ” which would have made the emails non-responsive and explain why they were not produced.”

      Another possibility was that the emails were in the possession of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, which had worked with the FBI during its investigation. Contreras noted that “but for our purposes here, employees of the USPIS and FBI served together on the task force that spent years investigating the anthrax attacks and [the agency’s second declaration] stated that it ‘is FBI policy to import all records into the investigative case file.’ The Court cannot help but wonder, then, whether the FBI possessed certain USPIS-obtained records, or whether the FBI and USPIS had some record-sharing system in place with respect to the anthrax investigation.” A third possibility was that the emails had been destroyed or returned. Contreras found this unlikely, observing that “given the importance of the investigation, one would not expect the investigative files to be subject to a routine document retention policy with a short destruction date. And even if they were subject to such a policy, the investigation had only been closed for five years when Dillon submitted his FOIA request.” Noting that “the burden is ultimately on DOJ to show that its search was adequate,” Contreras ordered the agency to address Dillon’s evidence within 30 days. He observed that “the Court does not expect a definitive explanation for why the emails were not located or were not responsive ” though one would certainly be welcomed. What is important is that DOJ actually respond to the evidence Dillon has presented. If DOJ meaningfully engages with that evidence in a way that assures the Court that it has acted in good faith, the Court will enter judgment in its favor.”

      Contreras indicated that he was skeptical that all 2,000 pages of the FBI’s interim report qualified under the deliberative process privilege. He explained that “the easiest way for the Court to determine whether the IMCS is the product of such a process is to look at the requested excerpts.” He indicated that “if, after reviewing the excerpts, the Court concludes that the deliberative process privilege applies to the pages in their entirety, the Court will enter judgment in favor of DOJ. If, on the other hand, the Court concludes that the excerpts include reasonably segregable non-privileged information, the Court will permit the parties to renew their motions for summary judgment based on the other FOIA exemptions that DOJ has preserved in the alternative.”

      Issues: Search – Detailed description of search, Exemption 5 – Privileges – Deliberative process privilege – Deliberative, Litigation – In camera review

  7. DXer said

    Defense Department withholds money from Fort Detrick lab
    • By Heather Mongilio
    • Feb 5, 2020


    If ever there is a novel virus that combined a high infection rate with a high mortality rate, then it would be nice to have maintained USAMRIID surge capacity.

    I watched a number of episodes of “Pandemic” on Netflix this week. I have been bingeing recently on West Wing with an elderly relative and so Pandemic was a bit slow in comparison. (Apparently life in the White House and on the campaign trail is quite frenetic).

    But it behooves all of us to learn about the history about the coronavirus — for example, the 2009 swine flu and the 1918 Spanish flu.

    Swine flu infected ‘fifth of people’
    By James Gallagher
    Health and Science reporter, BBC News
    • 25 January 2013

    I think Bill Gates is right in his comments over the recent years about the importance of the public health issue.

    For example, unless I am misremembering, I believe the docuseries mentioned that up to 2 billion were infected in 2009. Yes, that’s with a “b.”

    As it is, I am tracking on a jhu website the rate of deaths and infection as to the current coronavirus and the slope looks pretty alarming.

    (Whether it is sound or not, I don’t know, but I take the rate that the numbers are doubling, and then project into late Spring).

    In the recent past, I have gone to Florida a lot. But I’m already wondering what the news about air travel in the US will be by St. Patrick’s Day, let alone tax day or Memorial Day.

    Locally, I am concerned about Chinese restaurants where the owners and employees work such long hours. I made a special point of going to order some steamed dumplings yesterday.

    Nurses worldwide deserve a special thanks for their service.

    Now go wash your hands and stop touching your face.

    And cough into your elbow.

  8. DXer said

    On 03/01/2007, IVINS provided a copy of the front of his laboratory notebook #40001, and pages 44, 45, 41 and 50. as follow up to questions regarding spores provided to. I Page 44 was marked with a red Post-it with the following circled with a pink highlighter: 6. Add the I 1…-_______ —11 in a fermentor. More spores provided to to ___________ 1 June 98. Bruce Ivins – 6/1/98

    [Note: This would be a typo. It should read notebook 4010]

    To whom did Ivins provide additional spores on June 1, 1998?

    (279A-WF-222936-BEI )

    Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense

    It is not listed on the inventory control sheet for Flask 1029.

    To make things easier on the overworked and underfunded (and presumably well-meaning) FBI FOIA personnel, perhaps they could just provide the attached pages 44, 45, 41 and 50 referenced in the 302.

  9. DXer said

    Jan 24, 2018

    Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), member of the House Freedom Caucus, joined the Todd Starnes Show today to discuss how the excuses being made for the missing text messages sound just like “the dog ate my homework” excuse. Rep. Jordan is also calling on a new special counsel to investigate the FBI’s handling of the Clinton probe and whether the investigation into allegations that Trump’s campaign officials had improper contacts with Russia was politically motivated. When asked what it’s going to take to clean house, Rep. Jordan said, “I don’t like special counsels but I don’t know any other way to hold people accountable who sure look like they did bad things.”


    “The dog ate my homework” is especially lame in Amerithrax. We specifically identified where Lab Notebook 4010 — the contemporaneous notes relating to the so-called “murder weapon” — could be located.

    In the case of Lab Notebook 4010, the FBI is not incompetent. The senior FBI employees are provably LYING when they say the requested documents have been uploaded or cannot be found.

  10. DXer said

    A Special Prosecutor is sought.

    FBI text messages lost because of ‘misconfiguration issues’ that perplex security analysts

    “We cannot expect the DOJ and FBI to properly investigate themselves with so much significant, mounting evidence of misconduct at the highest levels
    “This is unusual and contrary to FBI policy, which requires that all records be preserved unless they are specifically cleared for disposal,” said Steve Aftergood of the Federation for American Scientists. “Is it the sign of something nefarious? Maybe.”


    The FBI has failed to give back Notebook 4010, the laboratory Notebook relating to the so-called “murder weapon” Flask 1029.

    It was never cleared for disposal. If a Special Prosecutor is appointed, his appointment should extend to consideration of other instances where the FBI has lost or destroyed records it should have preserved — or where it simply is playing hide-the-ball on an important issue.

  11. DXer said

    J.Edgar Hoover accepted Richard Nixon’s application to the FBI in 1937. Then his acceptance was cancelled as “not qualified.” Why?

    For an amazing piece of history using the threaded historical documents, see

    Why was Richard Nixon’s FBI application rejected?
    According to the Bureau’s own files, not even J. Edgar Hoover knew for sure
    Written by JPat Brown

    If FBI had not released the documents, we would never know the story.


  12. DXer said

    “We have a sworn declaration from David Hardy who is the chief FOIA officer of the FBI that we obtained just in the last few days, and in that sworn declaration, Mr. Hardy says that all of Comey’s memos ‒ all of them ‒ were classified at the time they were written, and they remain classified,” –Chris Farrell, director of investigations for the conservative group Judicial Watch

    That’s awkward. The FBI Director will release his own (reportedly classified) notes but not the unclassified notes of Bruce Ivins, who needed his notes to defend against the FBI’s theory that he had was a murderer. Does former FBI Director Comey now agree that his notes were classified? (i haven’t been following the issue). Does he have a legal theory excusing their release?

  13. DXer said

    Politics and these comments by Bannon to be published is off-topic … except that in the event that either Kushner or Don, Jr. are indicted — as seems increasingly likely — President Trump will go after
    former FBI Director Mueller.

    Amerithrax was Mueller’s biggest “whodunnit.” Many critics, me included, think the case was botched. So the President would have done well to direct FBI Director Wray to ensure that the FBI complied with FOIA in regard to Amerithrax.

    Mueller was the first to admit that Amerithrax was riddled with conflict of interest — it was the nature of the small field of anthrax researchers at the time. (As an example, the FBI’s chief scientist JE is the one who made a dried powder out of Flask 1029 and this was kept from the public until I drew JE out and we got him on film setting the record straight.

    I think Mueller’s solution of compartmentalization was in good faith (and certainly he is highly experienced in complex criminal prosecutions). At the same time, I agree with former lead Amerithrax investigator Richard Lambert’ criticism that it likely would prevent Amerithrax from being solved if people only saw pieces of the puzzle. I think in the end that is what happened — but what, in fact, happened, under any theory, has still not been persuasively established.

    I personally advocate only for the rule of law on both Amerithrax the hot button issue of Donald Trump’s campaign and Presidency — though like Tribe, not Dershowitz.

    My own view is that the FBI reached a mistaken conclusion but I haven’t seen that any outside critic could have done better in real time; people often will disagree about a whodunnit or mystery. Then Ivins’ suicide threw a monkey wrench in the course of the investigation and any prosecution.


    Trump Tower meeting with Russians ‘treasonous’, Bannon says in explosive book

    Bannon remarked mockingly: “The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn’t have any lawyers.

    “Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.”

    Bannon went on, Wolff writes, to say that if any such meeting had to take place, it should have been set up “in a Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire, with your lawyers who meet with these people”. Any information, he said, could then be “dump[ed] … down to Breitbart or something like that, or maybe some other more legitimate publication”.

    Bannon added: “You never see it, you never know it, because you don’t need to … But that’s the brain trust that they had.”


    “You realise where this is going,” he is quoted as saying. “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”

    Last month it was reported that federal prosecutors had subpoenaed records from Deutsche Bank, the German financial institution that has lent hundreds of millions of dollars to the Kushner property empire.


    Trump is not spared. Wolff writes that Thomas Barrack Jr, a billionaire who is one of the president’s oldest associates, allegedly told a friend: “He’s not only crazy, he’s stupid.”

    Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense

  14. DXer said

    In a June 16, 2015 FOIA Appeal, Dillon argued: “FBI needs to release Notebook 4010 regarding Ivins’s Flask 1029 …”

    Ken Dillon’s June 19, 2015 FOIA Appeal relating to Amerithrax documents from September-October 2001
    Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 1, 2015

  15. DXer said

    In his Freedom of Information Act Appeal dated June 6, 2016, Ken Dillon sought, among other things:

    “Laboratory Notebooks: FBI needs to release the remaining pages of Notebook 4010 regarding Ivins’s Flask 1029 …”

    Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 6, 2016

  16. DXer said

    The title of the Notebook that the FBI has so steadfastly failed to produce is titled “Anthrax Spores.” It was first created 5-12-97. Ivins’ handwriting appears on the cover and throughout. I’ve previously (mistakenly) reported that the notebook is 88 pages. But I now understand it to be at least 98 pages. (The last page on the excerpt I snagged is light and I mistook a “9” for an “8”.)

    You will be SHOCKED to know why the FBI employees are withholding it. As the former lead Amerithrax investigator Richard Lambert told the New York Times and Fox News, the FBI is withholding a staggering amount of information exculpatory of Bruce Ivins. And this was FBI Director Mueller’s biggest case. If the FBI is to be understood to stand for the rule of law, this notebook should be produced without further delay.

    • DXer said

      In an entry in Notebook 4010 dated 3-17-98, Ivins reports that:

      “I am going to run some tests on the RMR 1029 Ames spores. I have less than 1 ml of RMR 1030 Ames spores (used in the F97-08 rabbit challenge” for use as a control.”

      This is significant. Flask 1030 was genetically similar to the anthrax used in the mailings — but from this entry, we see that it had been used up in the animal challenge prior to March 17, 1998.


    • DXer said

      In this 3-17-98 entry in Notebook 4010 — one of the few that has escaped to see the light of day — Ivins writes:

      “The RMR 1029 spores have been stored … in the B3 cold room (walk in).
      The 2 tubes of spores will be irradiated to kill the spores.”

    • DXer said

      In an entry 3/18/98, in another one of the few entries has escaped to see the light of day — Ivins writes:

      “Aliquots of a …. dilution of RMR 1029 spores were spread onto 10 plates of 5% sheep blood agar (in Difco blood agar base) and 8 plates of capsule agar. The plates were inoculated overnight at 37 [degrees] in B304.”

      Of course, where Ames was — and when — is of key relevance to analysis of the distribution of the Ames. Thus, the FBI’s withholding of the vast majority of Notebook 4010 is not just unreasonable, it is outrageous.

    • DXer said

      At page 82 of Notebook 4010, in an entry in early April 1998 — in another rare entry that has escaped to see the light of day — Ivins included a copy of an email he had written April 2, 1998:

      “Remember the many shipments of Ames spores from Dugway that ____ and I purified in Renografin? These are “GLP” Ames spores (30 trillion total, 1000 ml at 30 billion per ml). They are (presumably) to be used in experiments for support of the AVA relicensure effort. We have tested them in several ways, and they look very good…”

      At page 84, he identifies the name of the person at the Michigan Biologic Product Institute who asked him to make some B. anthracis Vollum 1B spores for him on agar media.

      Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense

    • DXer said

      In a June 1, 2000 entry, he identifies the individual at Bioport Corporation to which he shipped the Vollum 1B spores. And then at 96-97 he includes documents from the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, Ministry of Health, State Research Center of Applied Microbiology.

      The FBI was in serious violation of FOIA when it did not return a copy of the CD with Ivins’ notebooks to the USAMRMC, when USAMRMC FOIPA Sandra Rogers first requested it.

      As the originating agency, it is the USAMRMC/USAMRIID has the expertise to redact it pursuant to the statute.

      Moving forward, with DOJ counsel involved that understands FOIA, things should be set on the proper course moving forward.

    • DXer said

      The mailed anthrax was NOT grown on New Sporulation Media (NSM). One advantage of obtaining Ivins notebooks detailing the culture medium used was to exclude particular anthrax.

      Moreover, Dr. James Buran had directed the culturing of BA on various types of growth media. The purpose of the initiative was to determine whether or not the nutrient medium contributed to the finding of the tin, silica and iron in the spore coat of the mailed anthrax.

      The notebooks are exculpatory of Bruce Ivins. The FBI cultivated its “Ivins Theory” out of thin air.

      • DXer said

        Typo: That’s Burans, not Buran.

        If you study the updates on the work by the FBI’s Science Squad, you can see an exclusive focus on Hatfill in 2003 — with reference to the flask of BT taken from Hatfill’s refrigerator, the famous “minnow trap” seized from the pond in Maryland pond etc. Scott Decker went from investigating a Hatfill Theory to developing the science that would support a Hatfill Theory. The blinders — the truncation of analysis — only allowed wiggle room sufficient to shift to an “Ivins Theory.”

    • DXer said

      Seeing the notebooks also is instructive as to the number of plates needed to grow the anthrax. An FBI Special Agent attempted to replicate the culture, harvest and drying methods potentially used by the suspect. [Even the word “suspect” in the forensic update perhaps, to some, is revealing; the author’s use of “suspect” perhaps refers to Hatfill when read in context]. Gram quantities of anthrax spores were used. (Each letter contained 1-2 grams). The FBI Special Agent’s study found that approximately forty (4) 150 mm plates would be required to produce EACH gram of dry processed spores. (You can refer to the National Academies finding to see if in total 450 plates were needed; I don’t have it in front of me).

      I am not a scientist. My goal is to obtain the notebooks and then permit the scientific experts to have the benefit of them in their consideration of the FBI’s “Ivins Theory.”

    • DXer said

      The Science Squad forensics updates in 2004 would regularly note:

      “The evidentiary material showed a spore coat with high Silicon content … To date, no other submitted samples have shown this characteristic.”

      This avenue of inquiry — this important forensic “Silicon Signature” of the mailed anthrax — makes a review of Bruce Ivins’ notebooks all the more important. He and his technicians were NOT using silica in the growth medium.

      Instead, that was done at the DARPA Center for Biodefense where Ali Al-TImimi shared a suite and computers and fax machine with the Ames anthrax researchers Ken Alibek and Charles Bailey. (See their patent filed Spring 2001). (Bailey was former acting commander of USAMRIID). Famed Russian bioweaponeer Ken Alibek’s company, Advanced BIosystems, had the biolevel 3 work done at Southern Research Institute in Frederick. (Former SRI officials Voss and Franz decline to say when SRI first obtained virulent Ames, but it provably had supposedly avirulent Ames long before the mailings. (see unclassified contract documents).

      Dr. Bailey in 2001 once told the press that he was not going to mention the use of silica in making a bioweapon because he didn’t want to give terrorists any ideas. (Forget floatability; it serves a different purpose; “if I told you I’d have to kill you”). The trouble was that the office of a supporter of the jihadis was only about 10 feet away from Dr. Bailey when he said the words to the reporter.

      Dr. Al-Timimi was sentenced to two life sentences — plus 70 years — for discussing the plans of some young men who wanted to go abroad and defend their religion. About all Ali did, for all I know, is tell them that if they were stopped at the airport to ask for their mom and cry like a baby. So it seems that his sentence was awfully harsh — perhaps some analysts were concerned that he had access to DARPA bioweapons technology. His appeal — 12 years later — is being heard this year, I believe, on the grounds that the FBI withheld information about his fellow Falls Church imam, Anwar Awlaki, the now dead guy who has urged that Al Qaeda attack in a massive anthrax attack.

      John Ezzell, the FBI’s scientist at USAMRIID — and the longtime friend and colleague of the science squad scientists — consulted with DARPA and was the one who made a dried powder out of the Ames in Ivins’ Flask 1029. (But he did not use silica and there seems no reason to think the powder he made would have shown such a signature). (John gets credit for coming forward and answering quite a few questions on film at a conference organized by Dillon and moderated by Lew; Dr. Ezzell deserves major props).

      Given all the extreme conflicts of interest that riddled the FBI’s forensic investigation, the FBI should comply with FOIA. It’s not too much to ask given US cities still face a mass anthrax attack.

      As another example (just one of many) of potential bias or interest in the matter constituting a potential conflict, the DNA work was being done by Les Baillie, who had innocently hosted infiltrator Rauf Ahmad, Ayman Zawahir’s spy sent from Pakistan. Rauf Ahmad helped design Al Qaeda’s lab and was protected by ISI; the interrogating FBI and CIA agents were served tea and cookies by a servant at the ISI safehouse under Rauf Ahmad’s direction.

      Ha! Another example was that the lead criminal prosecutor, Seikaly, had a daughter who represented Ali Al-Timimi pro bono. The prosecutor’s sister-in-law and brother argued that Bin Laden was not responsible for 9/11.

      As another example of potential bias or interest in the subject matter, Jason B. had been the bacteriology collection scientist at ATCC (which shared the GMU facilities with Alibek and Bailey). So while we can credit everyone’s good intentions, and I blame only Ayman Zawahiri (planner), Yazid Sufaat (processor), and Adnan El-Shukrijuah (mailer), we should not be blind to how bias may have guided the investigators and the scientific inquiry. It is analogous to the Trump Russia investigation. Maybe the fact that the lead investigator thought Trump is an idiot and the country needs to be protected from him, influenced his judgment. The best cure is greater transparency. Above all, regardless of one’s biases, there needs to be compliance with the rule of law — compliance with FOIA.

      Absent compliance with FOIA and the rule of law — absent return of Ivins’ notebooks to USAMRIID — there needs to be sanctions against the FBI employee primarily responsible for the withholding.

      • DXer said

        An August 4, 2004 “AMX Weekly Science Update” states: “4 samples supplied by Ivins lab at USAMRIID, indicate a lack of silica in the spore coat.”

      • DXer said

        The September 16, 2004 “AMX Weekly Science Update” noted that “Analysis of the __________ and [Flask] 1029 samples indicated that they are negative for the silica in the spore coat.”

      • DXer said

        In September 2004: “CTFSRU has explored three electron microscopy techniques which may be suitable for use as a first screen to indicate the presence of spore preparations. This week CTFSRU was able to recognize the presence of silica in either spore preparations or single spores. This SEM method will be used to quickly screen batches of that material for the incorporation of silicon.”

      • DXer said

        In Fall 2001, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (”AFIP”) had detected silicon dioxide (silica) and silicon in the attack anthrax — with a characteristic big spike for the silicon.

        Dr. Alibek and Dr. Bailey at the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense had filed a patent application in mid-March 2001 involving a microdroplet cell culture technique that used silicon dioxide in a method for concentrating growth of cells. The patent was granted and the application first publicly disclosed in the Spring of 2002. Weren’t the SEMS images and AFIP EDX finding both consistent with use of this process in growing the culture? In its report, AFIP explained: “AFIP experts utilized an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (an instrument used to detect the presence of otherwise-unseen chemicals through characteristic wavelengths of X-ray light) to confirm the previously unidentifiable substance as silica.” Perhaps the nuance that was lost — or just never publicly explained for very sound reasons — was that silica was used in the cell culture process and then removed from the spores through a process such as centrifugation. The applicants in March 2001 for an international patent relating to vaccines were a leading aerosol expert, Herman R. Shepherd, and a longstanding anthrax biodefense expert, Philip Russell.

        Dr. Morozov is co-inventor along with Dr. Bailey for a patent “Cell Culture” that explains how the silicon dioxide can be removed from the surface. Perhaps it is precisely this AFIP finding of silicon dioxide that is why the FBI came to suspect Al-Timimi in 2003 (rightly or wrongly, we don’t know). The FBI would have kept these scientific findings secret to protect the integrity of the confidential criminal/national security investigation. There was still a processor and mailer to catch — still a case to prove. After 9/11, intelligence collection takes precedence over arrests. As Ron Kessler explains in the new book, Terrorist Watch, many FBI officials feel that they are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. Outside observers are constantly second-guessing them about how to proceed rather than trusting that they are in the best position to balance the competing considerations of national security, intelligence gathering, the pursuit of justice, and the safeguarding of civil liberties. Above all, in disclosing the theory of access to know-how, the FBI has needed to protect the due process rights of Al-Timimi while he defended himself on other charges.

        An example from October 2006 of equipment that went missing from GMU’s Discovery Hall was a rotissery hybridization oven belonging to the Center for Biomedical Genomics. “This equipment can be used to manufacture biological agents and genetically modified agents, which could potentially be used as biological weapons,” Corinne Verzoni explained in her PhD 2007 thesis. “Upon hearing about instances or missing equipment in Discovery Hall, the author contacted campus security who was unaware of instances of missing equipment. Missing equipment should be reported to the equipment liaison. Missing equipment may not be reported to campus security because labs tend to share equipment. Equipment also goes missing because it is not inventoried if it is under $2,000.”

        One of her other examples was equally dramatic:

        “A DI system is a de-ionized water system, which removes the ions that are found in normal tap water. The assistant director for operations noticed the DI system in Discovery Hall was using the entire 100 gallons in two days, which is an enormous amount of water for the four DI taps in the whole building. According to the assistant director for operations, it is difficult to calculate the reason for that much water since no leak was found. A large amount of water used over a short period of time for unknown reasons could indicate that the research is being conducted covertly.”

        “A student with legitimate access to Discovery Hall,” she explained, “has easy accessibility to equipment. A student with access to the loading dock could steal equipment on the weekend when campus security is not present in Discovery Hall. A student could also walk out of the entrance with equipment on the weekend without security present.” She concluded: “The events at GMU demonstrate opportunity to create a clandestine lab, the ability to sell items illegally, or the ability to exploit school equipment.” In a late September 2001 interview on NPR on the anthrax threat, Dr. Alibek said: “When we talk and deal with, for example, nuclear weapons, it’s not really difficult to count how much of one or another substance we’ve got in the hands. When you talk about biological agents, in this case it’s absolutely impossible to say whether or not something has been stolen.”

        Al-Timimi’s prosecution was remanded — in what I believe is an on-going proceeding — so that the defense could be given an opportunity to discover any documents that existed prior to 9/11 about al-Timimi and to address an issue relating to NSA intercepts after 9/11. Ali’s defense counsel explained to the federal district court, upon a remand by the appeals court, that Mr. Timimi was interviewed by an FBI agent and a Secret Service agent as early as February 1994 in connection with the first World Trade Center attack. The agents left their business cards which the family kept. Defense counsel Johnathan Turley further explained that “We have people that were contacted by the FBI and told soon after 9/11 that they believed that Dr. Al-Timimi was either connected to 9/11 or certainly had information about Al Qaeda.”

        Al-Timimi worked for SRA in 1999 where he had a high security clearance for work for the Navy. (Did he work, per chance, for James Burans? It is a small world, after all).

        At a conference on countering biological terrorism in 1999 sponsored by the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. Dr. Alibek was introduced by a former colleague of Dr. Bailey:

        “Dr. Llewellyn: This is rather strange because I just met Dr. Alibek today. He was introduced to me by Dr. Charlie Bailey, who now works for SRA. But Charlie and I were associated with the Army Medical Research and Development Command Defense Program for over 20 years.”

        When I emailed Dr. Bailey in December 2007 to confirm Ali had the room right near his at Discovery Hall and whether he had worked with Al-Timimi at SRA he politely referred me to counsel and took no questions. Dr. Alibek and Dr. Popov have told me that Ali is not known to have worked on any biodefense project. Dr. Popova told me I should direct any such questions to Dr. Bailey. Dr. Bailey told me I should direct any questions to University counsel. University counsel declined to answer any questions.

        Dr. Bailey and Dr. Alibek had the work with virulent Ames subcontracted out to Southern Research Institute (“SRI”) in Frederick, Maryland. See press releases at time using Wayback machine; 2003 telephone interview of Ken Alibek. Its President at the time, Tom Voss, and Vice-President, the influential and personable David Franz, refuse to tell me when SRI first acquired virulent Ames. True to an earlier warning, DF stopped responding to inquiries when I pressed the point.

        The foundation of the genetic inquiry into the 4 morphs was built on quicksand — depending as it did on self-reporting and correct assessment of the distribution of virulent Ames. Dr. Relman pointed this out in his SCIENCE piece titled “Have We Met The Enemy?” Science can be hugely misleading if the validation focuses only on statistics and implications are drawn without understanding the true crime context in which the question is framed. Until we know the distribution of Ames and what happened to the large amount of virulent Ames made by Dr. Ivins’ assistants, for example, the genetics inquiry is especially meaningless.

        We can’t know from where virulent Ames might have been stolen without having confidence as to where it was. All that was needed was a single door left open.

        People should show the same courage and forthrightness that Dr. Ezzell showed in explaining that he made dried powder out of Ames from Flask 1029 for the DARPA researchers after it had been irradiated. Most of all, the US FBI should embody the rule of law through its actions — and comply with FOIA without further delay.

    • DXer said

      Although USAMRIID, the USAMRMC FOIA Officer and I first sought Notebook 4010 years ago, Ken Dillon first featured Notebook 4010 — being wrongfully withheld by the FBI — prominently in his June 19, 2015 Freedom of Information Appeal.

      The FBI took what I’ll call the AUSA Lieber-crafted view: Requesters have received all they are ever going to get. (Commonly, in boilerplate they bizarrely claim it has already been provided.)

      This has remained FBI’s position even while the former FBI lead Amerithrax investigator has claimed in a lawsuit that the FBI has intentionally concealed information exculpatory of Bruce Ivins.

    • DXer said

      Former FBI Agent Scott Decker notes the background of Flask 1029: “In 1997, Ivins calculated they would need ten trillion spores to complete the increase in vaccine challenges that were planned. It would take him two years to produce that amount, so Ivins contracted production to a laboratory noted for its past chemical and biological weapons testing. (Recounting the Anthrax Attacks, p. 128).

      • DXer said

        Former FBI Agent Scott Decker explained in his recent book that Woods Hole scientists had determined that the anthrax that was mailed in the attacks was grown most likely between 1998 and 2001. (Recounting the Anthrax Attacks, p. 119)

  17. DXer said

    The Washington Post editorial board refers to Joby Warrick’s article in its editorial.

    There’s a deadly new threat from North Korea
    By Editorial Board December 12 at 7:39 PM

    I have no idea why journalists have not obtained a copy of the 1999 testimony by the senior members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad about Al Qaeda purchasing anthrax from North Korea. (Indeed, in excellent but overlooked reporting, Lance Williams already reported the same in 2001)

    It would be hard for me — I don’t have the resources, experience or network of contacts of a major newspaper to obtain a transcript of the testimony and translate it. Such a report would not compel any particular connecting of dots; but if we face a possible biological attack by North Korea, it is a relevant background fact worth reporting. FBI Director Mueller reports that the FBI could not identify the strain of anthrax possessed by North Korea — could not turn over certain rocks abroad.

    In the meantime, I appreciate that Attorney Richard Lambert, in saying that the FBI is withholding a staggering amount of information that is potentially exculpatory of Bruce Ivins, thinks that there are privacy and national security constraints on disclosure, But the application of the FOIA exemptions, as a matter of law, is up to the originating agency. No exemption applies except some minor pro forma (b)(6) redactions of a proper name or two.

    NYT interview of former lead Amerithrax investigator Richard Lambert: “a staggering amount of exculpatory evidence” regarding Dr. Ivins remains secret
    Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 16, 2016

    The case Amerithrax is closed. And the FBI is not the owner of the documents that Dillon, I — and the USAMRMC FOIA officer — have been requesting for years. The Army is free to invoke a national security or other exemption with respect to the contents of any notebook, if one is applicable. But there isn’t. The notebook pages simply are potentially exculpatory of the late Bruce Ivins. And FBI is engaged in a knee-jerk CYA reaction.

    The US District Court should require that the FBI return a copy of Bruce Ivins’ notebook to the USAMRMC for processing under FOIA without further delay. It’s been over a half decade and the FBI’s delay is unreasonable. The FBI should pay Dillon’s attorneys fees and the individual primiarlly responsible for its withholding identified and sanctioned if there is continued withholding.

    At the same time, the White House should order the FBI to comply with FOIA so that the rule of law is vindicated. Who knows, maybe disclosure of the facts would remove the sheen on former FBI Director Mueller’s white knight armor. It seems that the Russia investigation is about to get ugly absent some creative “out-of-the-box” thinking on Mr. Trump’s part.

    As for the distinguished FBI Director Wray (who sets the same high standard as his recent predecessors), he pays lips service to the “rule of law” but then has allowed the FBI to bury Bruce Ivins lab notebook relating to Flask 1029, the so-called “murder weapon” in Amerithrax. The FBI’s concealment of the 88 page notebook violates the rule of law. I realize he has many responsibilities, and this narrow issue in a FOIA matter may have escaped his attention, but he should direct the FBI employees to return the requested notebooks to USAMRMC (USAMRIID).

    At the end of the day, we’re all on the same team.

    Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri: The Infiltration of US Biodefense

  18. DXer said

    Who is the employee “primarily responsible for the withholding” of Notebook 4010 when I asked for it some years ago — and USAMRMC FOIA officer Sandra Rogers asked US DOJ that copies of all of the notebooks be returned to USAMRIID?

    Who is the “officer or employee primarily responsible for the withholding” of the other notebooks she requested be returned? (For example, the notebooks copied at the USAMRIID Library and put on a CD (or seized and not returned in 2007), would have included Notebook 4010).

    Who is the “officer or employee primarily responsible for the withholding” of Notebook 4010 when Ken Dillon initially asked for it — before he had to avail himself of the services of OGIS?

    Who is the “officer or employee primarily responsible for the withholding” of Notebook 4010 in recent months?

    What about the recent days and weeks after I pointed out that USAMRIID was the originating agency and long ago had asked that it be returned to USAMRIID for processing?

    5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(F) provides:

    Whenever the court orders the production of any agency records improperly withheld from the complainant and assesses against the United States reasonable attorney fees and other litigation costs, and the court additionally issues a written finding that the circumstances surrounding the withholding raise questions whether agency personnel acted arbitrarily or capriciously with respect to the withholding, the Special Counsel shall promptly initiate a proceeding to determine whether disciplinary action is warranted against the officer or employee who was primarily responsible for the withholding. The Special Counsel, after investigation and consideration of the evidence submitted, shall submit his findings and recommendations to the administrative authority of the agency concerned and shall send copies of the findings and recommendations to the officer or employee or his representative. The administrative authority shall take the corrective action that the Special Counsel recommends.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: