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

Archive for the ‘* FBI refusal to testify’ Category

* NAS continues to participate in the FBI’s stonewalling efforts to keep the truth about the 2001 anthrax attacks away from public scrutiny

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 15, 2010

On December 8, 2009, I wrote to NAS spokesperson Willian Kearney as follows …

BILL … It is utterly incredible to me, and very disappointing, that you, and thus the NAS, have simply ignored the questions I have asked regarding the FBI-submitted information. If you have reasons for not releasing information, why not state them? Do you have any intention of ever responding, even if only to tell me that in your judgment my questions are inappropriate? … LEW

This was in followup to questions posed in prior emails …

  • Could you please provide an update on current NAS intentions by answering the following questions …
  • Does NAS still plan to withhold some or all FBI-submitted documents until the end of the study?
  • If so, will NAS provide a list of withheld FBI-submitted documents?
  • If NAS is planning to withhold some or all FBI-submitted documents until the end of the study but release them at that time, what legal authority does NAS cite for doing so?
  • Will NAS provide a list of any FBI-submitted documents which NAS is intending to permanently restrict from access, indicating in each case the specific exemption which is being cited to justify that action?

To date, there has been no response to my December 8 email. NAS has apparently decided to participate in the FBI’s stonewalling efforts to keep the truth about the 2001 anthrax attacks away from public scrutiny, regardless of the laws regarding disclosure of information.

******

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question … Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?

Here’s an early discussion by the (fictional) DIA team investigation the FBI anthrax investigation …

“Let’s start with the assumption the Bureau is not dumb,” Sowickey began. “So that can’t be the excuse for the lamebrain way they conducted this supposedly high priority investigation. Nor can it explain the way they failed to establish links between pieces of information they clearly had. Nor why they hinted for years that Farmer was the perp and then gave him $5.8 mil to go away. There was, by the way, even less evidence implicating Dr. Farmer than there was on Dr. Ingram, which is close to nothing. After seven years.”

Click here to …  buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

Advertisements

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * NAS review of FBI science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 21 Comments »

* DXer … observations on the FBI anthrax investigation

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 12, 2010

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question … Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case? Here, the (fictional) DIA team considers the role of the President and Vice-President in the early days of the FBI’s anthrax investigation …

“Then a curious thing happens. A second attack is made against the great country, this time with lethal anthrax powder mailed in envelopes.

“The very best police force in the land is assigned to track down the person or persons who prepared and mailed the lethal anthrax envelopes.

“But even before any evidence is obtained, the great leader announces the desired result – there may be some possible link to Saddam, he says; I wouldn’t put it past him. The great vice-leader also chimes in, saying that ‘Saddam had henchmen who were trained in the use and deployment of these kinds of substances, so you start to piece it all together.’

“I would ask you to note that these instantaneous, unsupported allegations are directed at Saddam; Osama, who sent the planes, is not mentioned.”

Click here to …  buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

in paperback or kindle

******

DXer … observations on the FBI anthrax investigation

******

these comments are extracted from DXer’s comment to the post … * DXer … Keith Olbermann, who has strongly questioned the FBI’s “Ivins did it all” conclusion about the 2001 anthrax attacks, needs to talk more with his frequent guest Jonathan Turley about Turley’s client Al-Timimi

access

  • it once had been estimated that 1,000 were known to have access.  16 labs.  Perhaps a few more abroad where there no cooperation or where it had been obtained surreptitiously.  That was narrowed, depending on whose estimate you rely on, to 100-300.  At just a few labs rather than 16+.
  • On this central issue of access, the US DOJ committed the most fundamental misdirection imaginable — with no mention at all of Building 1412 where the virulent Ames was often used and appears even to have been stored the first full year when it just sat unused in an unlocked refrigerator.
  • They used the phrase “sole custody” as if it had practical meaning when applied to an unlocked refrigerator or a package left overnight on a desk for shipping — or that was available any time it was used from contamination.

*** see related post … * USAMRIID RMR records – Dr. Bruce Ivins’ flask 1029 – two documents don’t match

genetics

  • In terms of criminal attribution, the genetics … points away from the fellow who was the “go-to” guy for the strain because he would not want to use a weapon with his name on it.

forensic evidence

  • we’ve not heard anything about the failure to associate Dr. Ivins with any copy machine that produced the forensic signature.  Hair, fiber, Tin Signature, Iron Signature, alibi… everything points away from Dr. Ivins, not toward him.

FOIA (Freedom of Information Act)

  • Had there been compliance with FOIA by USAMRIID, EPA and the University of Michigan and Louisiana State University, an Ivins Theory could have been flushed down the toilet many months ago.

*** see related post … * a few of the critical pieces of information the FBI/DOJ are still hiding in apparent violation of FOIA requirements to disclose

Silicon signature

  • When the DOJ gets around to triumphantly explaining that the Silicon Signature was due to a “microencapsulation process,” rather than post-production addition of an additive for the purpose of aiding floatability, will it constitute anything more than admitting to their unproductive obfuscation of the issue by their withholding of the AFIP data?

LMW COMMENT …

It seems clear beyond any shadow of doubt that the “Ivins did it” theory presented by the FBI simply does not hold water. So who really did commit the worst bio-terrorist attack in the history of the U.S.?

  • Does the FBI have more evidence that it is not making public?
  • Has the FBI in fact solved the case but is covering up the real perpetrators?
  • Has the FBI simply failed, after its largest investigation in history, to solve the case?

******

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , | 124 Comments »

* why have Dr. Ivins’ emails concerning his whereabouts when the anthrax letters were mailed in Princeton not been released? who is withholding this information?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 10, 2010

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question … Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case? Here’s the (fictional) DIA Director giving the charge to his team re-investigating the FBI anthrax investigation …

“Those FBI bastards hounded a Defense Department employee until he committed suicide, if it was suicide. After seven years the FBI hasn’t come close to making a case that could convict the lowest grade criminal, let alone an internationally respected scientist. And they think they can say ‘case closed’ and sweep their incompetent investigation under the rug?”

“I’ve already spoken to Secretary Morgan,” General Drysdale continued. “The Secretary agrees that the Defense Department is taking an unwarranted hit from the FBI, and we don’t know why. At my request, the Secretary has authorized us to find out what really happened.

“You’re the team I’ve selected. You’re authorized to go where you need to go, ask what you need to know. You’ll have whatever resources are necessary.

Click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

in paperback or kindle

******

why have Dr. Ivins’ emails

concerning his whereabouts when the anthrax letters

were mailed in Princeton

not been released?

who is withholding this information?

******

DXer’s comment …

Dr. Bruce Ivins

It used to be reasoned that the mailer would be living alone — because otherwise his wife would know.  Dr. Ivins’ wife, in a private note to Dr. Ivins, stated that she knew he had nothing to do with it.  That is a pretty compelling piece of evidence as to her private thoughts.  Especially after the first mailing when the public was sensitive to the matter, the FBI would not have met its burden on the evidence disclosed that Dr. Ivins could have travelled without being observed.

In terms of what has NOT yet been disclosed, there likely are contemporaneous emails from those days that both would establish his location at some particular times and would refer to how he was spending his time generally.

It thus is worth noting that the most probative evidence, such as contemporaneous emails from the dates they allege processing and mailing and Lab Notebook 4010, are being withheld.

Instead the affidavit in support of probable cause for a search referred only to his inability to justify his time in a 2005 interview (or at least that is their characterization). At the same time there was a FOIA for exit/entry times, there was a FOIA for emails.

Why are they withholding the emails? They were processed many months ago but are being withheld.  The FBI’s unsupported factual assertion of travel therefore is in the context of a refusal to provide the documents that might corroborate or contradict their assertion.  If someone cannot back up their claims and refuses to provide documentary support, a logical inference is that the evidence does not support the claim.

Anonymous Scientist’s comment …

I think this is a very good observation. If Ivins sent time-stamped emails on the days he supposedly drove to Princeton to mail the letters this immediately destroys the FBI’s theory. There would have to be at least 12 hour windows of zero emails sent in a distinct pattern. There would also have to be 12 hour windows of zero cell phone usage, zero credit card usage etc.

I think it’s obvious they DON’T have this – and they know fully well that releasing emails will immediately have internet bloggers all over the emails analyzing them for gaping holes in the FBI’s theory.

Michael Green (see below) also pointed out that the FBI failed completely to adequately describe how Ivins made the powder and Green similarly concluded that the reason the never explained it is simple – they couldn’t.

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/FBIFrameupOfIvins.html

It is important not to distract ourselves with the task of resolving exactly what attributes the Senate anthrax spores had — attributes that the FBI and DOJ have deliberately kept secret and muddled through confusing and contradictory press leaks and releases. It is wiser to rely on the obvious inference that if the FBI had a simple, straightforward, true and compelling story to tell about how Ivins could have made such a deadly powder in a few brief spates at night, they would have told it.

They did not tell it because they did not have it.

******

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , | 27 Comments »

* it’s well past time for the Congress and President Obama to insist that the FBI tell the truth about the 2001 anthrax attacks

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 6, 2010

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question … Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case? Here’s an early discussion by the (fictional) DIA team investigating the FBI anthrax investigation …

“Let’s start with the assumption the Bureau is not dumb,” Sowickey began. “So that can’t be the excuse for the lamebrain way they conducted this supposedly high priority investigation. Nor can it explain the way they failed to establish links between pieces of information they clearly had. Nor why they hinted for years that Farmer was the perp and then gave him $5.8 mil to go away. There was, by the way, even less evidence implicating Dr. Farmer than there was on Dr. Ingram, which is close to nothing … after seven years.”

Click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

in paperback or kindle

******

it’s well past time for the Congress and President Obama

to insist that the FBI tell the truth

about the 2001 anthrax attacks

******

DXer comments …

FBI Director Mueller

  • Didn’t FBI Director Mueller’s well-intentioned order compartmentalizing the Task Force not merely prevent the “connecting the dots” but also exercising such personal responsibility?
  • An early internal FBI memo talked about how only creative and self-starting investigators should be assigned to Amerithrax.  But lead Investigator Lambert appears to have been right in objecting in a written memo to Director Mueller’s order of compartmentalization.
  • Director Mueller strikes me as a stand-up and very smart guy who, despite his numerous and overwhelming responsibilities, will do all he can to reach a successful and correct Amerithrax resolution — despite the obstacles.   He no doubt understands that dozens of scientists, attorneys, intelligence analysts, and prosecutors have cast serious skepticism about the FBI’s characterization of its evidence against Dr. Ivins.  The validation of the science by the NAS is an irrelevant sideshow given the nature of the gaps in the evidence presented thus far by the FBI.
  • Their characterization of the proof of Ivins’ guilt profoundly undermined the public’s confidence.  It is as if the investigators and officials were motivated by a fear of being sued for Dr. Ivins’ death.
  • There is something worse than being sued. That’s getting the Crime of the Century wrong — when a threatened aerosol attack of a major city using anthrax may be at stake.

Anonymous Scientist comments …

FBI announces - August 8, 2008 - that Dr. Bruce Ivins is the sole perpetrator and the case will soon be closed

  • I think the situation for the FBI/DOJ is very complex. They were clearly hoping that the Taylor/Persichini presentation of August 2008 was not going to met with such skepticism from elected officials, scientists, the media and the public.
  • Since August 2009, their position has gotten worse – there is even more skepticism as the details of the science are looked at deeply – the impossibility of one person making the spores, one person creating the powder, presence of silicon etc.
  • If it were not for the huge skepticism, unusually bipartisan with high-profile senators even openly accusing the FBI of a cover-up, the case would likely have been closed last year.
  • But it wasn’t. It’s very interesting that the two likely main architects of the “Ivins dead-man” resolution to Amerithrax are the DOJ’s Jeffrey Taylor and the FBI’s Washington DC head Joseph Persichini. These guys seem to be at the heart of the joint DOJ/FBI decision to accuse Ivins. They staked their reputations on it – and you would think they would have been keen to formally close the case. Clearly something happened to ensure that the case was not closed in a timely manner (of course we’ve heard the usual feeble excuses like “tying up loose ends” etc. – but clearly something major happened.
  • Taylor resigned in May of last year – about 2 months before the supposed July 24 2009 date for closing the case (which never happened). Persichini was removed from his position has FBI DC head in December 2009 (purportedly for cheating at an exam).
  • Thus the two architects of the “Ivins dead man” resolution are no longer there. So what will happen now with closing the case? Will Taylor and Persichini’s replacements embrace the “Ivins dead man” resolution? How could anybody in good conscience buy into this?
  • More importantly, what does Mueller do? Let’s start with the premise that if the DOJ/FBI are forced to change their minds that Ivins did it alone – that Mueller could not survive and would have to resign. Surely there could be no other path left for Mueller if that turns out to be the case.
  • With this premise in mind, Mueller’s future tenure may be at stake on the entire Amerithrax resolution. Will Mueller gamble that some new narrative that Ivins acted alone be bought by the same senators, scientists, media and public that are today so skeptical. Or will he feel this is too much of a gamble and would only make him and the FBI look worse if they try it?
  • On the other hand if the FBI change their mind about Ivins acting alone – isn’t that still enough to force Mueller to resign?
  • Is the above the reason why nothing is happening?
  • Because any outcome has a bad ending?

LMW COMMENT …

Either the FBI

  • has in fact solved the 2001 anthrax case and is covering up the real perpetrators by putting forth its pathetic “Ivins did it all” theory,
  • or they didn’t solve the case and are using the “Ivins did it all” theory to cover their own failure.

Which is worse?

And isn’t it well past time for the Congress and President Obama to insist that the FBI tell the American people the truth?

******


Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * NAS review of FBI science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , | 76 Comments »

* Glenn Greenwald … the case against Ivins doesn’t hold up, the anthrax attacks contributed to the war of choice in Iraq, and there is little apparent interest in learning the truth

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 29, 2009

CASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … Here’s an excerpt from the CASE CLOSED story; an early discussion by the (fictional) DIA team investigation the FBI anthrax investigation …

“Let’s start with the assumption the Bureau is not dumb,” Sowickey began. “So that can’t be the excuse for the lamebrain way they conducted this supposedly high priority investigation. Nor can it explain the way they failed to establish links between pieces of information they clearly had. Nor why they hinted for years that Farmer (ie, Hatfill) was the perp and then gave him $5.8 mil to go away. There was, by the way, even less evidence implicating Dr. Farmer than there was on Dr. Ingram (ie, Ivins), which is close to nothing. After seven years.”

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

the case against Ivins doesn’t hold up,

the anthrax attacks contributed to the war of choice in Iraq,

and there is little apparent interest in learning the truth

******

Glenn Greenwald writes for Salon (11-27-09) …

  • Yesterday, the British Ambassador to the U.S. in 2002 and 2003, Sir Christopher Meyer (who favored the war), said attitudes towards Iraq were influenced to an extent not appreciated by him at the time by the anthrax scare in the US soon after 9/11.
  • On 9/11 Condoleezza Rice, then the US national security adviser, told Meyer she was in “no doubt: it was an al-Qaida operation” . . .
  • the anthrax scare “steamed up” policy makers in Bush’s administration and helped swing attitudes against Saddam
  • the anthrax attack was exploited by leading media and political figures to gin up intense hostility towards Iraq.
  • The case against Ivins is so riddled with logical and evidentiary holes that it has generated extreme doubts not merely from typical government skeptics but from the most mainstream, establishment-revering, and ideologically disparate sources.
  • Even our leading mainstream, establishment-serving media outlets — and countless bio-weapons experts — believe that we do not have real answers about who perpetrated this attack and how.
  • And there is little apparent interest in investigating in order to find out.

read the entire article at … http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/11/27/anthrax/index.html

LMW COMMENT …

******

My novel CASE CLOSED is all about the FBI’s purposeful failure to solve the anthrax case, specifically in order to allow it to be used as another lie in the argument for the war of choice in Iraq.

Is my story true? It’s a novel, but here’s what readers have to say …

  • “CASE CLOSED is entirely too plausible and is probably just the tip of the iceberg on what else was covered up.”
  • “Fiction?? Maybe?? But I don’t think so!! More likely an excellent interpretation of what may have really happened.”
  • CASE CLOSED is a must read for anyone who wondered … what really happened? … Who did it? … why?” … and finally, why didn’t they tell us the truth?”
  • “Please tell me it’s not true!”

Meanwhile, in the real world, the case remains unsolved, and the FBI remains intransigent.

Maybe when President Obama gets a minute to take on yet another issue, he will consider just how important it is to know who conducted a bio-terrorist strike at the U.S. and why the case remains unsolved.

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein


******

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , , | 72 Comments »

* what can we do to help Congressman Holt make his proposed Anthrax Commission a reality?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 8, 2009

CASE CLOSEDCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … Here’s an excerpt from the CASE CLOSED story; the (fictional) DIA team reviews the connection between the anthrax attack and the subsequent invasion of Iraq …

“After the nationwide panic caused by the anthrax mailings settled down, pretty much nothing happens in the FBI’s anthrax investigation. The next we hear about anthrax is in February 2003, when Secretary of State Abner Grant goes to the United Nations and holds up a vial of something – it wasn’t actually anthrax – claiming that Saddam can deliver biological weapons of mass destruction to the eastern seaboard of the U.S. Of course, we learn later that Saddam had neither WMD nor any way to reach our shores. U.N. arms inspector Blix said something much like that a few days before we invaded Iraq.”

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

what can we do to help Congressman Holt

make his proposed Anthrax Commission a reality?

******

Holt

Congressman Holt

I sent the following email to Congressman Rush Holt (11/8/09) …

I am the author of the novel CASE CLOSED and the blog of the same name, both based on the premise that the FBI has failed to make its case that Dr. Bruce Ivins is the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks (or even involved) and is withholding vital information from the Congress and the American people. I support your legislation to create an Anthrax Commission. My question is: what can I and those who frequent my blog do to help you get that legislation passed?

see related posts …

* Congressman Rush Holt meets with NAS panel, says their work is important but their mandate is too narrow; calls for passage of Anthrax Investigation Commission legislation he introduced in March 09

* In addition to asking the Attorney General to act, Congressman Conyers should move Congressman Rush Holt’s bill to create an Anthrax Investigation Commission

* the FBI’s answers to questions posed by members of the House Judiciary Committee in September 2008 as to certain aspects of the FBI’s investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks are insulting and demeaning to the U.S. Congress and to the American people

******

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , | 130 Comments »

* the withholding of information by various federal agencies has led to many complaints; here are examples of information withheld by the FBI, NAS, EPA and FAA.

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 19, 2009

CASE CLOSEDCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … click here to … buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

Here’s what readers say about CASE CLOSED  …

“Responsible Americans who believe in holding our government accountable for its actions should read CASE CLOSED to be more informed of the facts of the case, regardless of whether they come to agree with the author’s theory. More investigation is needed.”

“You will not want to stop reading … Lew Weinstein addresses the 2001 anthrax case with the pen of a highly skilled investigator.”

******

the withholding of information by various federal agencies

has led to many complaints; here are examples of information

withheld by the FBI, NAS, EPA and FAA

******

It has become commonplace for the public to complain that federal agencies refuse to comply with FOIA requirements and other legitimate requests for information. How can a democracy work, critics say, when its government officials refuse to obey the law and provide the information essential to public debate?

The Amerithrax investigation is of course the prime concern of the CASE CLOSED blog, and many are frustrated that more information has not been forthcoming regarding this matter.

However, since it is the correct solution of Amerithrax that we all desire, perhaps the best approach is for everyone (the agencies and those requesting information) to conscientiously review the standards that control and apply them to the facts.

******

Politicians charged with oversight are aghast when the FBI refuses to answer direct questions from Congressmen and Senators … see related post … * Sen. Grassley says he will hold nominees at the DOJ until he receives long overdue answers from the FBI

******

I am frustrated when the FBI will not respond to my questions as to why the Amerithrax investigation is still open more than a year after the FBI accused Dr. Ivins of being the sole perpetrator and 3 months since they emphatically repeated that the closing of the case was imminent … see related post … * Is the FBI’s anthrax case ongoing or not? … I’ve been asking for two months … the FBI refuses to answer … here’s the email trail

******

I am surprised when the NAS won’t even answer my questions regarding the basis for sequestering FBI-submitted documents in apparent violation of FOIA requirements … see related post … * It’s well past time for the NAS to be frank and honest about what it has agreed with the FBI regarding the sequestering of FBI-submitted documents in apparent violation of FOIA requirements

NOTE: the day after this post was published, the NAS reversed its previously stated position … see related post …

* the NAS will provide FBI-submitted documents and the NAS/FBI anthrax study contract

******

In addition, DXer reports that the EPA refuses to waive the fee for FOIA documents he has requested, in apparent violation of its own policies and his plainly demonstrated commitment to disseminate the information to the public which was their basis for denying the request…

Fee Waivers and Reductions (from the EPA webpage):

  • The Freedom of Information Reform Act of 1986 provides that documents shall be furnished without any charge or at a  reduced charge if disclosure of the information is in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to general public understanding of the operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.
  • A fee waiver or reduction of fees must be requested and justified by supporting documentation.  If you request a fee waiver, explain how the information will be used in the public interest and to what extent, if any, use of the information will be in your commercial interest.  Include statements on how you plan to disseminate the information, as well as your qualifications that are relevant to any specialized use of the documents.

DXer comments … This was a simple easy standard for the EPA to understand and apply.  Why should we expect the FBI to solve a difficult crime when FOIA officers cannot even comply with simple documents requests and apply simple standards?

******

This frustration over not being provided information is not new, as evidenced by the FAA withholding from 9/11 Commission, as described in John Farmer’s new book GROUND TRUTH …

  • The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) tells the 9/11 Commission it has already given the Commission all the documents it asked the FAA for.
  • John Farmer, head of the Commission team investigating what happened on the day of 9/11, finds this hard to believe, as the boxes of material the FAA has provided do not contain many tapes or transcripts of FAA communications on the day of the attacks. [Shenon, 2008, pp. 201]
  • Later interviews of FAA staff will reveal there is a mountain of evidence the FAA is withholding from the  Commission (see September 2003).

******

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * NAS review of FBI science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments »

* still no answers from NAS

Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 9, 2009

CASE CLOSEDCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … click here to … buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

Here’s what readers say about CASE CLOSED  …

“CASE CLOSED takes headline events and weaves a credible scenario around the anthrax scare and government departments working under the radar.”

“Lew Weinstein is a meticulous researcher and a determined storyteller. CASE CLOSED  will keep you up at night — reading, then worrying.”

******

email from Lew to NAS (10-9-09) …

It’s now been a month, and no answers to the questions I have asked regarding the NAS/FBI decision to withhold documents in apparent violation of FOIA law.

Why is this so difficult for NAS?

Your failure to respond, and to at least explain your decision, makes NAS look bad.

see related posts …

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * NAS review of FBI science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , | 17 Comments »

* no news regarding the FBI’s “on the verge of closing the case” or the NAS decision to sequester FBI-submitted documents … in this case, “no news” is the news

Posted by Lew Weinstein on September 22, 2009

CASE CLOSEDclick here to … buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

Here’s what readers say about CASE CLOSED  …

“Lew’s  story is a quick read. In July 2008 a physician employee of the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases dies. The FBI immediately not only declares the death a suicide, but also announces that the doctor had been their prime suspect in the 2001 anthrax murders by mail. “I don’t @#$%ing think so!” says the director of the nation’s Defense intelligence Agency (DIA) and a covert investigation of the FBI itself begins.”

******

For those keeping track of such matters …

… Anonymous Scientist reported yesterday “We are now at T+ 58 days since the FBI announced they were ‘on the verge’ of closing the anthrax case.”

… nor has the FBI responded to my questions as to whether the Amerithrax case is still ongoing or not.

… it is also 14 days since I was advised that the NAS has agreed with the FBI to sequester FBI-submitted documents until the end of the NAS review. I questioned that decision and have received no response to my questions. Thus, I sent another email today …

email to NAS 9-22-09

******

see related posts at …

* the NAS needs to explain its decision to sequester FBI-submitted documents in apparent violation of FOIA law

* the FBI, so certain a year ago, may now be terrified to expose its unconvincing case to public scrutiny, or may now have reason to believe that Dr. Ivins may not have been the SOLE perpetrator, or even involved at all

.


Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * NAS review of FBI science, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , | 19 Comments »

* Sen. Grassley says he will hold nominees at the DOJ until he receives long overdue answers from the FBI

Posted by Lew Weinstein on September 18, 2009

CASE CLOSEDclick here to … buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

readers of CASE CLOSED say …

“Weinstein raises some very interesting and disturbing theories.”

“Responsible Americans who believe in holding our government accountable for its actions should read CASE CLOSED to be more informed of the facts of the case, regardless of whether they come to agree with the author’s theory. More investigation is needed.”

******

Senator Grassley

Senator Grassley

Excerpts from U.S. Sen. Grassley’s statement on FBI oversight hearing … 9/17/2009

In March of this year, Director Mueller testified before this Committee and I expressed my concerns and frustration at the lack of responsiveness from the FBI in answering questions submitted by all members of the Judiciary Committee.

Director Mueller shared in my frustrations noting that the FBI had provided responses to outstanding questions to the Department of Justice for review, but that the Department has not yet provided them to Congress.

As we stand here today we have questions from a previous FBI Oversight hearing dated March 2008 that remain outstanding and unanswered. That hearing was held over a year and a half ago.

Not having responses to these questions is beyond unacceptable.

So, the question is did the Department simply forget to get back to the Committee or do they have something to hide?

Mr. Chairman, we have a real issue with the Department of Justice and until this culture of late and unresponsive answers to our questions is changed, I will exercise my rights to begin holding nominees at the Department.

read Sen. Grassley’s entire statement at … http://www.iowapolitics.com/index.iml?Article=170440

Posted in * FBI refusal to testify, * questioning the FBI's anthrax investigation | Tagged: , , , , , | 28 Comments »