* Did USAMRIID’s John Ezzell and Terry Abshire, through no fault of their own, turn out to have a massive conflict of interest?

* FBI scientist John Ezzell has explained that dried Ames and Sterne spores went to studies for DARPA at Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Labs in Columbia, MD

* In addition to the 340 ml. of virulent Ames shipped to USAMRIID on June 27, 2001, Dugway shipped 175 ml. of Ames anthrax strain in late August 2000. That was when Dr. Ezzell, the FBI’s scientist at USAMRIID, made a dried powder out of Ames anthrax strain from Ivins’ Flask 1029 for the DARPA JHU-APL mass spec. project.

* Terry Abshire in a document produced this week under FOIA explains that the genetically matching sample she had in her lab was not submitted in the initial set ; instead, wasn’t her lab provided genetically matching material in August 2000 for DARPA research in which Dr. Ezzell made a dried powder out of the Ames and gave it to the DARPA researchers?

******

Dr. Ezzell at November 2010 anthrax seminar in DC

******

******

* Is Southern Research Institute the phrase that fits in front of laboratory in regard to the location that aerosol work for DARPA was done? Was it Johns-Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory? Or instead were the special facilities built at USAMRIID. The research involved the FBI’s anthrax expert John Ezzell and his assistant Joany Jackman.

******

******

* why did the FBI keep evidence of John Ezzell’s dried powder from the NAS?

******

Throughout the investigation the FBI kept secret that the FBI’s anthrax expert at USAMRIID, John Ezzell, had made a dried powder out of RMR 1029 (which was the flask used for all wet aerosol challenges with Ames at USAMRIID from 1997 until 2002).  In the 9600 pages provided to the NAS, the FBI withheld all documents relating to this from the NAS.  Did the FBI scientists do this for national security reasons — or to cover their ass?

******

* Dr. John Ezzell, the FBI’s anthrax expert, attended a recent conference on the anthrax mailings … his comments answered some questions and raised others

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp, Dr. James Van de Velde at the Anthrax Mailings Investigation seminar ... UC Washington Center Nov 29, 2010

******

see Lew’s seminar interview on You Tube

“Case Closed” Author Lew Weinstein Discusses FBI Anthrax Cover-up and Possible Al-Qaeda …Involvementhttp://www.youtube.com/user/americassurvival#p/u/4/4zI69unuq6A

******

Dr. John Ezzell, the FBI’s anthrax expert,

and formerly Dr. Bruce Ivins’ colleague at USAMRIID,

shown above speaking at the anthrax mailings seminar.

His comments answered some questions and raised others

******

DXer has assembled the following points from documents produced by the FBI and from Dr. Ezzell’s comments at the conference and in past correspondence  …

1. Dr. Ezzell made dried powdered anthrax using Ames supplied by Bruce Ivins (which had been irradiated in the slurry).
2. his resulting dry powder was more pure than the Daschle product.
3. he made it at the request of DARPA for testing of mass spectrometry for biodefense detection purposes.
4. The work Dr. Ezzell did was done in Building 1412 at USAMRIID.
5. The virulent Ames was kept in the unlocked refrigerator.
6. The aerosol samples were put on tapes.
7. The DARPA researchers were testing the effect of a sonicator and corona plasma discharge on Ames spores.
8. In 2001 (and for a couple of years after that), Dr. Ivins had not known that dried powdered anthrax was being made at USAMRIID.

from which DXer asks the following questions …

Question #1: When was the dried powder created?

Question #2: Might the renografin Dr. Ezzell used create a Silicon Signature?

Question #3: Would traces of renografin be found (if it had been used in the mailed anthrax)?

Question #4: Is it correct that no traces of renografin were found?

Question #5: What is the effect of a corona plasma discharge on Ames spores? Would it create a unipolar charge?

Question #6: What is the effect of a sonicator?

Question #7: Besides Building 1412 and Johns-Hopkins, where else was the research involving a sonicator and corona plasma discharge done?

******

Sources: audiotape and videotape of Dr. Ezzell’s question and answer (link will be posted as soon as available)

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/91_1.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-08-at-8-54-20-am.png

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/83_aaa_jhapl_4.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/aaa_clues.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/aaa_ezzell_rev_rev_rev.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/aaa_casebook_rev.jpg

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-07-at-3-52-07-pm.png

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-07-at-3-52-23-pm.png

https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/screen-shot-2010-04-07-at-3-53-57-pm.png

******

******

******

LMW COMMENT …

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******

* the Nov 29 anthrax letters seminar

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp and Dr. James Van de Velde at the November 29 anthrax seminar sponsored by the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC) and the UC Washington Center

LMW COMMENT …

Kudos to the Frederick News Post and to Megan Eckstein, the only media which still seems interested in this case.

Why does the FBI continue to hold back on crucial details about this case while continuing to assert without “proof beyond many reasonable doubts” that Dr. Bruce Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the 2001 anthrax attacks?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

* Frederick News Post: the Ivins case lives on … despite FBI judgment

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp and Dr. James Van de Velde at the November 29 anthrax seminar sponsored by the University of California Institute for Global Conflict and Cooperation and the UC Washington Center

******

Editorial in the Frederick News Post (12/5/10)

Ivins case lives on — despite FBI judgment

• A group of 25 scientists, professors, writers and terrorism experts convened Monday to discuss and debate the anthrax investigation. None of them believe Bruce Ivins was the culprit. The panel, which lasted for four hours, talked about that investigation, lessons learned and its broader implications.

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_editorial.htm?StoryID=113323

******

LMW COMMENT …

I am coming more and more to the conclusion that the FBI’s stonewalling refusal to make clear to the American people what they know about the anthrax murders is a problem of equal importance to the fatal mailings themselves. To have an out-of-control police force in a democracy, answerable to no one, is a serious matter. We must not let the FBI win by letting this case fade away. Someone committed a bioterrorist attack against the U.S. It wasn’t Bruce Ivins, at least on the evidence so far made public. America needs to know the truth, no matter who is embarrassed or imprisoned.

* selected extracts from the presentation of Dr. Meryl Nass at the Nov 29, 2010 anthrax seminar

Dr. John Ezzell, Lew Weinstein, Ross Getman, Dr. Meryl Nass, Paul Kemp, Dr. James Van de Velde at the Anthrax Mailings Investigation seminar ... UC Washington Center Nov 29, 2010

******

The full text of Dr. Nass’ presentation has been posted on her blog site …

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2010/11/fbis-anthrax-letters-investigation.html

Here are selected extracts …

• FBI tried to close this case on August 1, 2008, 3 days after Bruce’s death.  The FBI orchestrated a crescendo of leaks about Bruce over several days, full of lurid details that aimed to create a picture of a “lone nut” for the American public.  Much of this material was inaccurate or exaggerated … a tawdry attempt to bury one of the most important cases the FBI has ever investigated.
• the anthrax letters helped pave the way for passage of the USA Patriot Act, for going to war with Iraq … and for expansion of the federal biodefense budget to 50 billion dollars and counting.
• Were aspects of Bruce’s death orchestrated as well?  Although the anthrax letters case was one of the FBI’s biggest ever, Bruce’s death somehow didn’t warrant an autopsy or an inquest. I have seen no report or evidence that the FBI informed anyone, especially Bruce’s medical providers, of his Tylenol ingestion.   Doing so in a timely manner would have almost certainly saved Bruce’s life and allowed the FBI to bring its case against him to its legal conclusion. Nor did FBI intervene to hasten Bruce receiving medical attention after his ingestion.

SOME FAILURES IN THE FBI’S CASE …

1.    FBI sent a letter to Bruce in April 2007, stating that he was not a target of the investigation.

2.    Why was no DNA obtained from Bruce until the week before his death?

3.    Why did Bruce retain his security clearance until 19 days before his death?

4.    FBI has failed to find evidence placing Bruce in New Jersey where the letters were mailed.

5.    FBI has failed to show how Bruce could have been at the mailbox during the window of time in which the letters were sent.

6.    FBI failed to find any anthrax contamination in Bruce’s car, home or possessions, although the simple act of placing a letter in the mailbox would have led to massive spore contamination of everything in the area, including the mailer. (See paper by FBI’s Doug Beecher)

7.    FBI’s February 2010 report tries to have it both ways.  It claims that flask RMR1029 was under Bruce’s exclusive control between its 1997 creation and the anthrax letter attacks.  The report claims that “only a very limited number of individuals had access” to the flask.  Later it admits that approximately 400 people at USAMRIID and a Midwest contractor laboratory had access to the spores.

8.    FBI claims Bruce had the know-how to produce the weaponized spores found in the Leahy-Daschle letters.  But FBI itself has failed to reverse engineer the spore production method, does not know what that method entails, and therefore cannot possibly know if Bruce had either the knowledge or access to all the equipment needed to produce such spores.

9.    FBI has failed to find any trace of the strain of Bacillus subtilis that contaminated the anthrax spores in the first set of letters, at USAMRIID or anywhere else.  Had the contaminated batch of anthrax been made at USAMRIID, the Bacillus subtilis strain would have contaminated the work space and been identified.

10.    FBI claims it ruled out 400 people who had access to the spores, but fails to explain anything about the processes used to rule these people out.

11.    Bruce passed two FBI polygraph tests, but later FBI claimed he used “classic” countermeasures to thwart the polygraphs.  Experts dispute this FBI claim.

12.    FBI’s report claims Bruce had access to a photocopier, but fails to note it was not the copier used to produce the anthrax letters.

13.    FBI initially reported that the water the spores were grown in came from the Frederick, Maryland area.  FBI later backed off this claim.

14.    FBI initially said that minor deviations in the pre-franked envelopes used for the anthrax letters showed they were purchased from the Frederick, Maryland post office.  Later FBI acknowledged they were sold widely in Maryland and Virginia.

15.    Nowhere in the February 2010 FBI report is there any acknowledgement that the crime could have involved more than one person.  Yet in my opinion, the logistics are such that it is almost a certainty more than one person was involved.

16.    The FBI obtained nearly all its 1,000 anthrax samples voluntarily from labs in the US and abroad.  This assumed that theanthrax mailer fully complied with the FBI request, even though it might incriminate him.  I’d call this a risky assumption, which undermines the foundation of the FBI’s entire case.

17.    FBI’s report postulates that two one-week windows of opportunity existed in which each batch of anthrax letter spores could have been grown, processed and mailed.  The time period for the first set of letters was September 11 through 18, 2001.  The period for the second set was October 1 through 8, 2001 (see page 6 of the FBI report).  FBI therefore reported focusing its investigation on individuals who had access to flask RMR 1029 and an anthrax “hot room” (a.k.a. BL 3 or 4 high containment laboratory) during these periods, in its attempt to identify and investigate all potential perpetrators. However, there are several problems with this assumption.  First, the US government did not know how many high containment labs existed in the US and abroad in 2001, as they did not have to be registered or inspected.  Some may have belonged to private companies or individuals. Second, although the anthrax letters were mailed during short windows of time, and the text included with the letters was probably written shortly before mailing, there is no reason to think that the spores had to be grown and processed during these periods. Since the FBI was unable to duplicate the process used to produce the spores, it is uncertain whether production in a particular lab could be completed during a one-week period. Spore production and processing could have taken place considerably earlier, and/or the spores might have been supplied to the mailer by another person.

NAS review of FBI’s anthrax science

The National Academy of Science panel will issue its report on the FBI’s microbial forensics soon.  But given the lack of information available for evaluation in the open literature, the NAS panel is handicapped by its overwhelming reliance on briefings by the FBI and its contracted scientists.  Until the standard procedures of peer review described above are completed, it will be very difficult to determine the validity and usefulness of the FBI’s research.

******

LMW COMMENT …

The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is clearly bogus: no evidence, no witnesses, an impossible timeline, science that proves innocence instead of guilt. So what really happened? And why doesn’t the FBI offer America a credible story?

I can imagine only 3 possible “actual” scenarios …

1. The FBI has more evidence against Dr. Ivins but is, for some undisclosed reason, withholding that evidence … POSSIBLE BUT NOT SO LIKELY
2. The FBI, despite the most expensive and extensive investigation in its history, has not solved the case and has no idea who prepared and mailed the anthrax letters that killed 5 Americans in 2001 … EVEN LESS LIKELY
3. The FBI knows who did it (not Dr. Ivins) but is covering up the actual perpetrators, for undisclosed reasons … THE MOST LIKELY SCENARIO

The “fictional” scenario in my novel CASE CLOSED has been judged by many readers, including a highly respected official in the U.S. Intelligence Community, as perhaps more plausible than the FBI’s unproven assertions regarding Dr. Ivins.

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

******