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

Posts Tagged ‘FBI refuses to answer anthrax questions’

* DOJ should overcome FBI’s withholding of documents about its “highly controversial” Ivins Theory so that people can get on same page and the history can be written

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 29, 2016

It wasn't Ivins

 

Screen Shot 2016-08-29 at 7.02.36 AM

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 12 Comments »

* Dr. Kenneth Dillon’s request for mediation services re DOJ’s withholding of Bruce Ivins’ alibi documents from Sept-October 2001

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 26, 2016

Office of Government Information Services
National Archives and Records Administration, Room 2510
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, Maryland 20740-6001
August 26, 2016

Re:  Appeal No. DOJ-AP-2016-003776
FOIA Request No. 1327397-000
MWH RCS

Office of Government Information Services:

I am an attorney representing Kenneth J. Dillon of Washington, D.C. in seeking your services in mediating with FBI and DOJ regarding his FOIA request for records on U.S. Army scientist Bruce Ivins in the anthrax mailings case.  Dr. Dillon is a retired academic historian and retired foreign service officer.  He requested records from September and October, 2001 regarding Ivins—specifically, unreleased emails, laboratory notebooks, paper and computer files, information about meetings, and telephone and credit card records, building entry and exit records, and records on Ivins’s animal experiments.  The purpose was to show his activities and whereabouts, a crucial kind of alibi evidence.

The anthrax mailings case was the largest criminal investigation in FBI’s history.  After Ivins committed suicide in 2008, FBI claimed that he had mailed the anthrax letters.  But it only selectively released documents, and there was no trial.  According to former chief investigator Richard Lambert, FBI has not released a “staggering amount of exculpatory evidence” (New York Times, April 8, 2015).  There are good reasons to believe that the mailings were in fact an al Qaeda attack.

Attached are Dr. Dillon’s original request of April 18, 2015; his appeal to DOJ of June 19, 2016; DOJ’s November 24, 2015 remand of his request to FBI for a search for responsive records; his appeal to DOJ of June 6, 2016; and DOJ’s denial of August 23, 2016.

Among the documents requested is Ivins’s laboratory notebook #4282, which includes the days September 14-18, 2001 when Ivins was purportedly preparing and mailing the first anthrax letters. In spite of my request and Dr. Dillon’s request, FBI has never released this notebook.

Sincerely yours,
Ross E. Getman
Member of DC and New York Bars

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 6 Comments »

* FBI cannot locate anthrax case lab notebook for the day first letters were mailed!

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 25, 2016

DXer says:

The former lead investigator of Amerithrax, Richard L. Lambert, has brought a whistleblower suit in federal district court.  He has alleged that the FBI is withholding a staggering amount of information that is exculpatory of the late scientist, Bruce Ivins.

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
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2016/07/16/nyt-interview-of-former-lead-amerithrax-investigator-richard-lambert-a-staggering-amount-of-exculpatory-evidence-regarding-dr-ivins-remains-secret/

FOX NEWS interview with RICHARD LAMBERT … Former agent claims FBI concealing evidence in anthrax case
Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 22, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/fox-news-interview-with-richard-lambert-former-agent-claims-fbi-concealing-evidence-in-anthrax-case/

FBI fights release of exculpatory information regarding 2001 anthrax attacks
Posted by Lew Weinstein on September 10, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/fbi-fights-release-of-exculpatory-information-regarding-2001-anthrax-attacks/

Ivins/Amerithrax-Notebook 4282 FOIA follow-up by DXer
Posted on June 13, 2016
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/ivinsamerithrax-notebook-4282-foia-follow-up-by-dxer/

By letter dated August 23, 2016, Attorney Matthew Hurd denied Kenneth Dillon’s appeal of the FBI’s denial of his request.  Dr. Dillon had requested all documents not yet produced relating to Dr. Bruce Ivins during the September-October 2001 time period.

Appeal
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2016/06/06/dr-ken-dillon-appeals-fbis-wrongful-stonewalling-of-documents-from-the-september-october-2001-time-period-of-the-anthrax-mailings/

Denial
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2016/08/24/by-letter-dated-august-23-2016-dojs-matthew-hurdy-has-failed-to-provide-dr-ivins-notebook-4282-which-has-notations-on-september-18-2001-the-date-of-the-fall-2001-anthrax-maili/#comment-45391

Dr. Dillon has a related pending request for the “Interim Case Management Summary” authored by Richard Lambert.

Many observers, including most outside scientists, have argued that the FBI’s “Ivins Theory” was unpersuasive.  The FBI reasoned that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab on particular dates.  Some DOJ and FBI officials reasoned he must have been making and preparing a powderized anthrax to kill 5 people.  I  have interviewed the Al Qaeda anthrax lab director Yazid Sufaat, however, and he does not deny responsibility for the Fall 2001 anthrax mailings.

Yazid Sufaat says that, contrary to some media reports, he was successful in developing anthrax, but prefers other bugs; he views anthrax as good for sabotaging, but not killing
Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 30, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/yazid-sufaat-says-that-contrary-to-some-media-reports-he-was-successful-in-developing-anthrax-but-prefers-other-bugs-he-views-anthrax-as-good-for-sabotaging-but-not-killing/

Al Qaeda anthrax lab technician tells DXer that he realizes that by addressing these issues he may “jack myself up” but says that the “plan is on the way” — what does he mean when he says the “plan is on the way”?
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 1, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/al-qaeda-anthrax-lab-technician-tells-dxer-by-chat-that-he-realizes-that-by-addressing-these-issues-he-may-jack-myself-up-but-says-that-the-plan-is-on-the-way-what-does-he-mean-when-he-s/

Hambali: Recommendation for Continued Detention (excerpt)
Posted by Lew Weinstein on April 25, 2011
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2011/04/25/hambali-recommendation-for-continued-detention-excerpt/

There were Al Qaeda operatives meeting with Mohammed Atta in the United States that were not caught (or were caught and released).

Ken Dillon asks … Who Was the Real Anthrax Mailer? … the key people in the anthrax mailings were not Bruce Ivins or Steven Hatfill … instead, they appear to have been Ali al-Timimi and Abderraouf Jdey.
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2010/03/28/ken-dillon-asks-%e2%80%a6-who-was-the-real-anthrax-mailer-the-key-people-in-the-anthrax-mailings-were-not-bruce-ivins-or-steven-hatfill-his-predecessor-as-the-fbis-target-instead-they-app/
Posted on March 28, 2010

Atta Was Coordinating With Jdey’s Associate Al-Hazmi, First In Fort Lee, NJ In Late August 2001 And Then In Laurel, MD in September 2001 ; Jdey’s Associate Nawaf Al-Hazmi Had Been At The Planning Meeting At Yazid Sufaat’s Kuala Lumpur Condo With Anthrax Planner Hambali And Anthrax Lab Director Yazid Sufaat And Yet The FBI Never Told The Public That Jdey Had Been Detained Along With Moussaoui In August 2001 (With Biology Textbooks) And Then Released
Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 25, 2012
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/atta-was-coordinating-with-jdeys-associate-al-hazmi-first-in-fort-lee-nj-in-late-august-2001-and-then-in-laurel-md-in-september-2001-jdeys-associate-nawaf-al-hazmi-had-been-at-the-planning/

DXer says … Adnan El-Shukrijumah, son of Saudi missionary, was the Fall 2001 anthrax mailer and FBI is withholding relevant documents
Posted by Lew Weinstein on May 12, 2016
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/dxer-says-adnan-el-shukrijumah-son-of-saudi-missionary-was-the-fall-2001-anthrax-mailer-and-fbi-is-withholding-relevant-documents/

DXer says: Adnan El-Shukrijumah is the anthrax mailer … on or about 9/13/2001, he phoned from KSM’s house to tell his mom he was coming to the US
Posted on June 6, 2014
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/dxer-adnan-el-shukrijumah-is-the-anthrax-mailer-on-9132001-he-phoned-from-ksms-house-to-tell-his-mom-he-was-coming-to-the-us/

Requestor Dr. Dillon is an academic and publisher.  He is a former intelligence analyst associated with the US State Department.  In testing the FBI’s theory that Dr. Ivins had no reason to be in the lab, he has sought Lab Notebook 4282 which contains contemporaneous handwritten notes about one of the many experiments he was working on (at pages 65-70).  The pages were first obtained by the FBI in 2003 and put in Part 1A of an FBI 302 report.  See 1A GJ 1100.

In response to Dillon’s FOIA request for information relating to Ivins’ activities in Sep.-Oct. 2001, the FBI falsely claimed that it had uploaded the information (such as Notebook 4282) to the FBI’s “Vault”
Posted by Lew Weinstein on October 15, 2015
https://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/in-response-to-dillons-foia-request-for-information-relating-to-ivins-activities-in-sep-oct-2001-the-fbi-falsely-claimed-that-it-had-uploaded-the-information-such-as-notebook-4282-to-the-f/

The original was then seized again in 2007 and not returned.  An FBI agent in an excel spreadsheet that has been produced explains that the notebook has entries from the time of the mailings. (See Part 55 of 59 of Amerithrax documents in the FBI’s “Vault.”)   The FBI and DOJ have failed to produce the notebook despite requests by both me and Dr. Dillon.  Specifically, there are notations from September 14, 15 and from September 18, 2001, the date of the first mailing.

The Army has sought the return of the notebooks taken by Dr. Ivins for years — and has uploaded all those that it has and that eventually were returned by the FBI.  Notebook 4282, however, still has not been returned.  According to USMRMC FOIA Officer Sandra Rogers, the FBI still has not returned Notebooks 4037, 4010 and 4282, preventing the Army from uploading them in USAMRMC’s excellent reading room that was created containing my FOIA requests directed to USAMRIID.
http://mrmc.amedd.army.mil/index.cfm?pageid=foia_reading_room.overview

I have uploaded the FBI discussing the documents relating to Notebook 4282 that is still subject of the DOJ and FBI’s game of hide-the-ball at the hyperlinks above.  I have forwarded them to Attorney Matt Hurd.  Attorney Hurd, who has been very gracious, has expressed a willingness to have an attorney reconsider the denial.  But that will lead to an attorney doing the same ineffectual searches in the decades-old database being used of words like “Notebook” “USMRMC.”  Instead, Attorney Hurd should pick up the phone and call FOIA analyst Meredith Savary or former lead Amerithrax investigator Richard Lambert or someone currently at the FBI who would know and ask where to find the documents.  To claim that the dog ate the lab pages in Dr. Ivins’ notebook on the date of mailing of anthrax that killed 5 people is unacceptable.  I am advised by FOIA Officer Ms. Rogers that the Notebook 4282 that the FBI has not returned is titled “Anthrax.”

This past week, Hambali, the supervisor of Al Qaeda anthrax lab director Yazid Sufaat, saw the light of a courtroom for the first time since his capture in 2003.  That’s an incredible 13 years without any transparency about his involvement in Al Qaeda’s anthrax program.

On this issue of the FBI blaming Dr. Bruce Ivins for the anthrax mailings,however, there is no justification for there not to be government in the sunshine.  The Department of Justice and FBI should comply with FOIPA.  The Department of Justice and FBI, first and foremost, should stand for the rule of law.

Anthrax, Al Qaeda and Ayman Zawahiri:  The Infiltration of US Biodefense
http://www.amerithrax.wordpress.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments »

* SECRETS- The FBI refuses to produce the 16 pages relating to an Ivins Theory in the “Interim Case Management Summary” without referring to another agency (even though the FBI is the originating agency).

Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 30, 2016

IvinsTheory

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

* Yesterday the FBI produced under FOIA a report of irradiated Ames samples at Dugway dating to the 1997 production runs for Ivins; irradiation is now known to have been commonly ineffective

Posted by Lew Weinstein on March 18, 2016

 

FOIAreDugwayirradiatedAmes

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

* responses to Congressman Nadler’s questions of the FBI regarding the % of weight of the silicon in the powder used in the 2001 anthrax attacks

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 20, 2011

Congressman Nadler & FBI Director Mueller

******

******

******


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 18 Comments »

* DXer … perhaps the next FBI Director will reopen Amerithrax … an investigation that was riddled with massive conflict of interest among its scientists that was allowed to continue even into the NAS review … NOTE: Mueller’s ten year term is up in Sept 2011

Posted by Lew Weinstein on January 7, 2011

FBI Director Robert Mueller

from DXer …

Perhaps the next FBI Director will reopen Amerithrax.

It was FBI Director Mueller who permitted the father of Ali Al-Timimi’s pro bono counsel to continue to head the prosecution and leak the hyped stories about Hatfill.  He didn’t want to order polygraphs because it would be bad for morale — and yet simply asking the question of Daniel likely would have prompted him to describe his disclosures.  AUSA Kenneth Kohl worked closely with Daniel for years and never changed his course.  Even assuming the good faith and expertise of all involved, the apparent conflicts of interest made closing a case fraught with innuendo and inferences unacceptable given what was at stake.

Al-Timini (convicted of inciting his followers to train overseas for violent jihad against the United States), former deputy USAMRIID Commander and then Battelle consultant Charles Bailey, Bush Chief of Staff Andrew Card

The threat the country faces from the Al Qaeda anthrax threat, we’re told, is of a mass aerosol anthrax attack on DC and NYC. Dress it up all you like but that is an existential threat for the United States of America.

I would think that FBI Director Mueller would want to rely on more than inference-upon-inference type case in an investigation that was riddled with massive conflict of interest among its scientists that was allowed to continue even into the NAS review… where the collection scientist from Ali Al-Timimi’s bacteriology division was not required to recuse himself.

The NAS may not have mastered this issue of conflicts of interest (see my friend Michael Jacobsen’s CSPI report) but the GAO knows conflict of interest analysis well.

see previous posts

* If it had become known that the Administration had allowed this infiltration — the Bush Administration would never have won a second term

* from DXer … Attorney Jonathan Turley regarding his client Al-Timini … is this the kind of connection it is critical for the Holt/Bartlett House committee to investigate?

* DXer: why should we trust NAS when they don’t comply with the statutory obligation to release the materials submitted by the FBI?

******

LMW COMMENT …

The FBI’s publicly presented 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?

As regular readers of this blog well know, 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 *


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments »

* have FBI Director Mueller and Congressman Holt met? if not, is a meeting scheduled?

Posted by Lew Weinstein on December 22, 2010

13 days have passed …

we have sent emails and made phone calls to Congressman Holt’s office,

none of which have been returned …

what’s going on?

******

 

FBI Director Mueller & Congressman Holt

******

On December 9, Congressman Holt wrote to FBI Director Mueller …

  • Despite the FBI’s original charge to the NAS to examine only the scientific data and conclusions in the case, it now appears that the FBI—which has consistently botched and bungled this case from the beginning—may be seeking to try to steer or otherwise pressure the NAS panel to reach a conclusion desired by the Bureau.
  • I ask that you meet with me this week to explain the FBI’s troubling conduct in this matter.

It has now been a week … Have they met? … Is a meeting scheduled?

******

NOTE:

Robert Mueller became the FBI Director on September 4, 2001.

It’s a 10 year appointment, ending in September 2011.

******

see also …

* DXer: why should we trust NAS when they don’t comply with the statutory obligation to release the materials submitted by the FBI?

* hints of conflict between the NAS and the FBI are found in the unexpected delay of the NAS report on the FBI’s anthrax science … the FBI is obviously trying to hide the truth as long as possible and the NAS is witholding documents it is required by law to release

******

LMW COMMENT …

FBI Director Mueller has a record of stonewalling, even members of Congress. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

Of course, by now you know my view of the FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins and their desperate effort to keep the facts from being known.

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 *

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 165 Comments »

* Holt demands Obama administration support further Amerithrax investigation … says FBI has stonewalled for a decade

Posted by Lew Weinstein on March 19, 2010

.

The New York Times says the FBI’s anthrax case has “too many loose ends.” Find out where some of those looses ends might have originated in my novel CASE CLOSED. Sure it’s fiction, but many readers, including a highly respected member of the U.S. Intelligence Community, think my premise is actually “quite plausible.”

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

.

.

UPDATE (3/19/10) … President Obama warned House Democrats this week that he will veto the intelligence authorization bill if it includes provisions intended to increase transparency within the CIA. It is the second time the White House has told the House Intelligence Committee that it will not support a version of the legislation that increases Congressional oversight of intelligence activities. The current draft of the bill would give the Government Accountability Office greater authority to review intelligence operations, require the executive branch to provide information about intelligence activities to the full House and Senate Intelligence committees and lay the groundwork for videotaping the interrogation of detainees in CIA custody.

LMW COMMENT … I tend to agree with the President regarding CIA transparency. The CIA is supposed to be a secret organization, doing secret and covert work on behalf of the American people. Congress has proven itself totally incapable of keeing secrets, even legitimate national security secrets. This issue, however, has nothing to do with the need to investigate the FBI’s failed anthrax investigation.

Congressman Holt’s Press Release  …

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/nj12_holt/maranthrax.html

March 18, 2010
Contact: Zach Goldberg
202-225-5801 (office)

  • (Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (NJ-12), Chair of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel and a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today responded to the Obama Administration’s concerns about two provisions he included in the 2010 Intelligence Authorization Bill that passed the House.
  • One provision would require the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community to examine the possibility of a foreign connection to the 2001 anthrax attacks.
  • Another provision would require the videorecording of all pertinent interactions between CIA officers and detainees arrested in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

“I am not surprised at the FBI’s opposition to [a Congressional investigation], given the fact that they have stonewalled every House and Senate member who has sought information on this investigation over last decade,” Holt wrote.

“What surprises me is that an Administration that has pledged to be transparent and accountable would seek to block any review of the investigation in this matter.”

A copy of Holt’s letter to Peter Orzag,

Director of the Office of Management and Budget …

March 18, 2010
Peter Orzag
Director
Office of Management and Budget
Eisenhower Executive Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20503

Dear. Mr. Orzag,

I am in receipt of your letter of March 15 to Chairman Reyes regarding the Administration’s concerns over two provisions I included in the Fiscal Year 2010 Intelligence Authorization Act (H.R. 2701). Let me begin by addressing the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s claims regarding my provision on the “Amerithrax” investigation.

As you may know, the 2001 anthrax attacks evidently originated from a postal box in my Congressional district, and they disrupted the lives of people throughout the region and the country. For months, Central New Jersey residents lived in fear of a future attack and the possibility of receiving cross-contaminated mail. Mail service was delayed and people wondered whether there was a murderer at large in their midst. Further, my own Congressional office in Washington, D.C. was shut down after it was found to be contaminated with anthrax. Therefore I have followed closely the case and the investigation.

In the wake of the attacks and at a number of points thereafter, a number of media reports—citing government officials, usually anonymously—suggested a possible link between the attacks and foreign entities. Most of these stories attempted to link Iraq to the attacks, but questions have also been raised about whether the strain of anthrax used in the attacks had been supplied to foreign laboratories.

My provision in H.R. 2701 is designed to have the DNI IG address those issues, to determine whether, in fact, all available intelligence on this topic was supplied to investigators. The provision itself is unremarkable in its scope and does not, contrary to the Bureau’s assertion, constitute Congress directing the Inspector General of the intelligence community to “replicate” a criminal investigation.

However, I am not surprised at the FBI’s opposition to it, given the fact that they have stonewalled every House and Senate member who has sought information on this investigation over last decade. What surprises me is that an Administration that has pledged to be transparent and accountable would seek to block any review of the investigation in this matter.

The Bureau has asserted repeatedly and with confidence that the “Amerithrax” investigation is the most thorough they have ever conducted—claims they made even as they were erroneously pursuing Dr. Steven Hatfill. Instructing the DNI IG to ensure that all intelligence information was in fact passed to the FBI would not “undermine public confidence” in the investigation.

Many critical questions in this case remain unanswered, and there are many reason why there is not, nor ever has been, public confidence in the investigation or the FBI’s conclusions, precisely because it was botched at multiple points over more than eight years.

Indeed, opposing an independent examination of any aspect of the investigation will only fuel the public’s belief that the FBI’s case could not hold up in court, and that in fact the real killer may still be at large.

However, that is not the primary purpose of this provision in H.R. 2701. It is appropriate that the Intelligence Community contemplate whether it did consider this case and would consider a similar case properly to protect Americans from bioterrorist attacks. The people of central New Jersey, the Congress, and the Administration need to know that every lead—foreign and domestic—was supplied to the FBI and investigated thoroughly. My provision in H.R. 2701 would help ensure this goal is achieved, and I urge the Administration to support this provision.

***
Thank you for your distinguished service to our nation.

Sincerely,

RUSH HOLT

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 14 Comments »

* 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

******

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