Posted on 08/27/2008 7:09:21 AM PDT by Prunetacos
They have worked for almost seven years in secret. Most people did not know that the work in Ray Goehner’s materials characterization department at Sandia National Laboratories was contributing important information to the FBI’s investigation of letters containing bacillus anthracis, the spores that cause the disease anthrax. The spores were mailed in the fall of 2001 to several news media offices and to two U.S. senators. Five people were killed. in those letters was not a weaponized form, a form of the bacteria prepared to disperse more readily.
ping
For a second there I thought the title read “Secret Santa.”
Can you say “drastic overhype”. There is nothing “nanotech” about the methods used. It is plain old electron microscopy, as done in dozens of labs around the world on a daily basis. I suspect Sandia was used more for their security clearances than for the technology.
Thanks for the post; link. Interesting. Ping.
“(anthrax)in those letters was not a weaponized form, a form of the bacteria prepared to disperse more readily.”
Anthrax in the letters was NOT weaponized....
it just acted as though it was!
Ping.
The headline does not match the article. There is nothing in it about determining the anthrax origin. Three of the samples looked alike under high magnification. Nothing more, nothing less.
BINGO!
DR. BURANS: It’s known that Bacilli are capable of mineralizing different types of elements including silicon, so as early as 1982 Bacilli species Bacilli species have been shown to localize silica within their spore coat.
QUESTION: Can I ask a follow-up?
DR. MAJIDI: It could have been within the growth media.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SCIENCE ANTHRAX PRESS BRIEFING, Monday, August 18, 2008 2:05 p.m.
This is what I believe. The purpose of silicon dioxide in the growth medium is to permit greater concentration with less sophisticated equipment by dampening vander waals forces. It was subject to a patent application filed March 14, 2001 at the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense which had a contract with USAMRIID involving research with the Ames strain of anthrax. When the patent was issued, I believe it would have gone to Al-Timimi’s maildrop. He shared a fax with the co-inventors. He was 15 feet from the co-inventors. The co-inventors were the leading anthrax scientist and former Deputy Commander USAMRIID. Ali had a high security clearance for work for the Navy in 1999. It is a waste of breath to debate whether a process by which anthrax can be better concentrated is related to “weaponization.” The process has a dual purpose and was billed as “bio-friendly.” Similarly, it is a waste of breath to debate whether the method is sophisticated. Something that is “pure spores” (a trillion concentratiton in the case of anthrax) is more floatable.
“At the same time that the DOJ and FBI are moving toward making more documents available, it’s still an open investigation and we remain limited today what we can discuss, which will be emphasized, I’m sure, time and time again; and that for a number of reasons. And when that status changes, obviously, there’ll be more information available to you.
***
The attribution process and identification of the specific perpetrator relies on the confluence of intelligence, investigations, and forensic information.”
Not only do they have no explanation for the subtilus contamination, but it was genetically distinct and not located at USAMRIID.
QUESTION: And then along those lines, was the subtilus contamination that was in the post —
DR. MAJIDI: Yeah.
QUESTION: Is that found in any of the other — anything else?
DR. MAJIDI: No. Again, you know, the bacillus contamination showed up in one batch, not in the other one, and it really didn’t drive us any place specific.
QUESTION: It didn’t show up in any of the eight matches, any of those samples?
DR. MAJIDI: Pardon?
QUESTION: So the stuff from the letter that matched eight samples — none of those had bacillus —
DR. MAJIDI: No. No.
The FBI’s position is that he did not follow instructions had not been given.
QUESTION: Was he the only person submitted before the subpoena was sent out?
BACKGROUND OFFICIAL: Yes. He was the only one.
***
BACKGROUND OFFICIAL: Let me clarify something first here. The first sample that he submitted was rejected because it was outside of the subpoena process. It didn’t comply with the full instructions of the subpoena.
DR. MAJIDI: The total body — the total universe of people at some point were associated with RMR-029 — I’ll qualify that. Roughly, about 100-plus.
QUESTION: Hundred-plus. Were those all at Detrick, or other labs —
DR. MAJIDI: No, they were at Detrick and other labs.
Comment:
OTHER LABS. Plural. Not one other lab as some press reports mistakenly reported. Labs. Not 100. About 100-plus. Plus means “more than 100.”
DR. MAJIDI: So a hundred people are within the universe of this RMR-1029 sample, and everyone was investigated. We looked a number of different factors that go into the investigation, and we were able to include and exclude specific individuals in that list.
QUESTION: So the forensic evidence narrowed you down to about a hundred people and then other types of evidence —
DR. MAJIDI: Forensic data — to RMR-1029, looking at people who have had access to RMR-1029 reduced that universe to a hundred-plus people, and then as we investigated every individual, we narrowed down our focus.
Comment: Their chief investigative means appears to have been this question: Have you or have you ever not participated in a panty raid. If so, do you have any trophy that we might submit to forensic analysis. My friend, Ed, will assist.
QUESTION: Just dried and then it just — you crumble it somehow? How do you —
DR. HASSELL: You got to understand, there are some national security implications if we give you all the details of the many possible ways to do this. So if we’re hedging a little bit, that’s —
QUESTION: Were the things available to Dr. Ivins? All the devices, were they in his lab, that would have been required to do this?
DR. MAJIDI: It would have been easy to make these samples at RID.
Comment: Ayman Zawahiri once wrote military commander Atef in April 1999 saying that they only came up with the idea of using aerosolized anthrax because the US government kept telling them how easy it was.
QUESTION: All right. But were you —
The reason I’m asking is because of 2004, a Michael Mason, who was the head of, I believe, the Washington Office of the FBI, went on the record and said that the FBI attempt to reverse-engineer the powders at Dugway failed —
DR. MAJIDI: Yeah. He was exclusively talking about the silicon signal.
QUESTION: So — he was exclusively talking a about the silicon signal, not the powders?
DR. MAJIDI: That’s right.
Comment: So let’s have a presentation on the different means they sought to replicate the silicon signal. Did they try silicone sealant on the inside of the envelope? Did they use equipment that had processed rice hulls (high in silica content). Did they grow the stuff in culture medium with silicon dioxide in the medium? Did they use the biochemistry information underlying the March 14, 2001 patent application filed by the former USAMRIID deputy commander and leading anthrax scientist involving silicon dioxide in the culture medium for the purpose of concentrating the anthrax? Did they use sol gel in the drying process to absorb moisture such as was done under an old method?
QUESTION: If it’s not clear if it was a deception, why did the affidavit label this as a failure to cooperate?
DR. HASSELL: Affidavit is a snapshot in time of what the investigative picture brings to bear. And this should really be looked at only as that. As we develop the case throughout, we may find information post-affidavit that may either support or nullify what’s in an affidavit.
Comment:
The affidavit was filed in good faith by the young investigators in support of a search. We would want the FBI to “leave no stone unturned.” But it did not begin to come close to proving Ivins guilty of the five capital murders. US Attorney Jeff Taylor, if he is not going to either set things right or alternatively resign for his performance at the press conference, then perhaps instead submit his name for confirmation by the Senate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.