Posted on 09/19/2008 9:29:23 AM PDT by Prunetacos
"I believe there are others involved, either as accessories before or accessories after the fact," Mr. Leahy said. "I believe there are others who can be charged with murder." Mr. Leahy's skepticism was echoed by GOP Sens. Arlen Specter (Pa.) and Charles E. Grassley (Iowa)...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
If he really means this, I’d sure love to know exactly who he has in mind.
Anthrax ping
This, IMHO, was another rush to judgment and will cost the taxpayers just like Hatfills case.
<Mr. Leahy said. “I believe there are others who can be charged with murder.”
Let’s start with Barack Obama’s good friends and mentors, William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.
Evidence, Senators? Leahy, Specter, Grassley, Manny, Moe and Jack.
“I’d sure love to know exactly who he has in mind.”
One page, hand-printed letter
Transmittal envelope, also similarly hand printed
Addressed to “Senator Daschle – 509 Hart Senate Office Building”
Return address – “4th Grade, Greendale School, Franklin Park, NJ”
Return address zip code – “08852”
Postmarked Trenton, NJ 10/09/2001 (Tues.)
LINGUISTIC ASSESSMENT
It is highly probable, bordering on certainty, that all three letters were authored by the same person. Letters 1 and 2 are identical copies. Letter 3, however, contains a somewhat different message than the other letters. The Anthrax utilized in Letter 3 was much more refined, more potent, and more easily disbursed than letters 1 and 2.
In the past, the public has helped the FBI solve high profile investigations that involved writings by coming forward to identify the author, either by how he wrote or by what he wrote. We are asking for the public’s help here again in the same way.
While the text in these letters is limited, there are certain distinctive characteristics in the author’s writing style. These same characteristics may be evident in other letters, greeting cards, or envelopes this person has written. We hope someone has received correspondence from this person and will recognize some of these characteristics.
The characteristics include:
Letter being removed from envelope 1. The author uses dashes (”-”) in the writing of the date “09-11-01.” Many people use the slash (”/”) to separate the day/month/year.
2. In writing the number one, the author chooses to use a formalized, more detailed version. He writes it as “1” instead of the simple vertical line.
3. The author uses the words “can not,” when many people prefer to spell it as one word, “cannot.”
4. The author writes in all upper case block-style letters. However, the first letter of the first word of each sentence is written in slightly larger upper case lettering. Also, the first letter of all proper nouns (like names) is slightly larger. This is apparently the author’s way of indicating a word should be capitalized in upper case lettering. For whatever reason, he may not be comfortable or practiced in writing in lower case lettering.
5. The names and address on each envelope are noticeably tilted on a downward slant from left to right. This may be a characteristic seen on other envelopes he has sent.
6. The envelopes are of the pre-stamped variety, the stamps denoting 34 cents, which are normally available directly from the post office. They are not the traditional business size envelopes, but the smaller size measuring approximately 6 1/4” x 3 ½”.
BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT
Based on the selection of Anthrax as the “weapon” of choice by this individual, the offender:
*
is likely an adult male.
*
if employed, is likely to be in a position requiring little contact with the public, or other employees. He may work in a laboratory. He is apparently comfortable working with an extremely hazardous material. He probably has a scientific background to some extent, or at least a strong interest in science.
*
has likely taken appropriate protective steps to ensure his own safety, which may include the use of an Anthrax vaccination or antibiotics.
*
has access to a source of Anthrax and possesses knowledge and expertise to refine it.
*
possesses or has access to some laboratory equipment; i.e., microscope, glassware, centrifuge, etc.
*
has exhibited an organized, rational thought process in furtherance of his criminal behavior.
*
has a familiarity, direct or indirect, with the Trenton, NJ, metropolitan area; however, this does not necessarily mean he currently lives in the Trenton, NJ, area.. He is comfortable traveling in and around this locale.
*
did not select victims randomly. He made an effort to identify the correct address, including zip code, of each victim and used sufficient postage to ensure proper delivery of the letters. The offender deliberately “selected” NBC News, the New York Post, and the office of Senator Tom Daschle as the targeted victims (and possibly AMI in Florida). These targets are probably very important to the offender. They may have been the focus of previous expressions of contempt which may have been communicated to others, or observed by others.
*
is a non-confrontational person, at least in his public life. He lacks the personal skills necessary to confront others. He chooses to confront his problems “long distance” and not face-to-face. He may hold grudges for a long time, vowing that he will get even with “them” one day. There are probably other, earlier examples of this type of behavior. While these earlier incidents were not actual Anthrax mailings, he may have chosen to anonymously harass other individuals or entities that he perceived as having wronged him. He may also have chosen to utilize the mail on those occasions.
*
prefers being by himself more often than not. If he is involved in a personal relationship it will likely be of a self serving nature.
Pre-Offense Behavior
*
Following the events of September 11, 2001, this person may have become mission oriented in his desire to undertake these Anthrax mailings. He may have become more secretive and exhibited an unusual pattern of activity. Additionally, he may have displayed a passive disinterest in the events which otherwise captivated the Nation. He also may have started taking antibiotics unexpectedly.
Post-Offense Behavior
*
He may have exhibited significant behavioral changes at various critical periods of time throughout the course of the Anthrax mailings and related media coverage. These may include the following;
1. Altered physical appearance.
2. Pronounced anxiety.
3. Atypical media interest.
4. Noticeable mood swings.
5. More withdrawn.
6. Unusual level of preoccupation.
7. Unusual absenteeism.
8. Altered sleeping and/or eating habits.
These post-offense behaviors would have been most noticeable during critical times, including but not limited to: the mailing of the letters (09/18/01 and 10/09/01), the death of first Anthrax victim, media reports of each anthrax incident, and especially the deaths and illnesses of non-targeted victims.
Not him.
Nor him.
Nor him.
Ping.
OK, I give up. Cheney?
He evidently also doesn't understand -- or doesn't want to understand -- the difference between using spores as a "weapon" and "weaponizing" spores for military purposes.
But, it really boils down to his beliefs versus the facts. He's saying, in effect, that he doesn't care what the facts say, he's going to believe what he wants to believe. And, if the facts don't support his beliefs, then the FBI needs to hunt for more facts.
I thought I read comments a short while after the Ivins story initially broke that the FBI considered the case closed, but the comments by Mueller the other day would seem to indicate that it really isn't.
“OK, I give up. Cheney?
Doubt it......
Cheney Thought He Had Lethal Anthrax Dose
Scare Prompted Veep to Take Hard Line onTerror Suspects, New Book Contends
By MARK MOONEY
July 14, 2008
In the days after 9/11, when fears of another terrorist strike were at their peak, Vice President Dick Cheney was convinced that he had been subjected to a lethal dose of anthrax, according to a new book.
White House insiders from that white-knuckle time told author Jane Mayer, who authored “The Dark Side, The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals,” that the scare contributed to Cheney’s insistence on hard-line tactics for fighting terror. Collapse
(Getty/ABC News)
White House insiders from that white-knuckle time told author Jane Mayer, who authored “The Dark Side, The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals,” that the scare contributed to Cheney’s insistence on hard-line tactics for fighting terror.
Mayer, a writer for the New Yorker, claims that the vice president became the driving force in pushing for tougher interrogation tactics that critics charge went over the legal line and constitute torture.
In the days after the horror of 9/11, the country seemed to be under assault from many sides, with anthrax letters showing up in Congress and newsrooms.
On Oct. 18, 2001, a White House alarm went off indicating that sensors had detected dangerous levels of radioactive, chemical or biological agents. According to Mayer, anyone who had entered the White House situation room, including Cheney, had been exposed.
“Serious question here, is this case officially “closed” or isn’t it?”
Mueller said the case is still open.
Ed, you’re THE MAN!
Barnes & Noble.com
Analyzing the Anthrax Attacks by Edward G. Lake
Average Customer Rating: Customer Rating for this product is 5 out of 5
Customer Reviews
Web’s ‘Authority’ on the Anthrax Case
ED Lake has become the Web’s Authority on the Anthrax case.
Despite the FBI’s contention that the late Dr. Bruce Ivins was the culprit,
Ed continues to pound away at the facts.
Prunetacos, A reviewer, 09/14/2008
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=QC7aOeEBUq&isbn=0976616300&itm=44
Cal, thanks for the ping.
It isn't. However, that doesn't mean that they're likely to find that someone other than Ivins did it. It just means that they still have some things they want to check out before they officially close the case. I understand that they want to do more investigation into things Ivins did on the Internet, emails he may or may not have sent, etc. I think they may also want to do more work with tracking down the source of the silicon in the spores. It could be a signature of some kind that would point to some specific procedure or product. For example, there's been a lot of talk lately about the use of an anti-foaming agent when preparing growth media (bacteria food). Anti-foaming agents contain silicon. So do thickeners. If Ivins routinely used anti-foaming agent or thickeners, it might help in the case against him.
Thanks for the review.
Despite the FBI’s contention that the late Dr. Bruce Ivins was the culprit, Ed continues to pound away at the facts.
My analysis was about a lot more than just who did it. There's a lot in my book about whether or not the spores were "weaponized." And that issue is still being argued, even though the facts clearly say the spores were NOT weaponized. There's also a lot in my book about why the FBI spent so much time "investigating" Steven Hatfill. That is something that is still being argued, too. And my analysis indicates that the anthrax mailer only wrote the DATE on the media letter; everything else was written by someone else (almost certainly an innocent party). That's an issue I'd also like to see resolved in some way.
Plus, there could be more facts that would conclusively show that some people's pet theories are bogus -- like the theory that Dr. Zack was somehow involved.
So, I continue to collect and analyze facts.
"Camel Club" - The group behind the camel and the poem (to Assaad) refer to themselves as the “Camel Club.” There are at least six members of this group. Three are known by name—Philip Zack, Marian Rippy, and Charles Brown—but the names of the others have never been made public."
Marian Rippy
Ever wonder who the other members of the Camel Club were?
Comments on the Barbara Rosenberg interpretation of anthrax investigation forensics
Serguei Popov, Ph.D., Sc.D.
Professor of Biology
George Mason University
12 September 2008
On September 8, 2008, Prof. Barbara Rosenberg presented her view on the evidence disclosed by the FBI in connection with anthrax investigation. Several points in Prof. Rosenberg’s interpretation attracted my attention and prompted me to share my thoughts with a broader audience.
***
Prof. Rosenberg
Studies conducted for the FBI at Sandia have shown that, as the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) first reported, (18) the attack spores contained Silicon and Oxygen, possibly in the form of SiO2 (silica). It was initially assumed that this indicated the presence of silica particles on the surfaces of the attack spores, a known strategy for preventing the spores from clumping and failing to aerosolize well. The FBI later found, however, that there were no silica particles on the surfaces of the spores. (19) Sandia was able to localize the Si to the spore coat. In anthrax spores, the spore coat is covered by the exosporium, which constitutes the surface of the spore. According to the FBI briefing, the presence of Si within the spore, as opposed to on its surface, would have no influence on the fluid-like properties of the spore powder.
Comment
First, the exosporium is an unstable and a diffuse structure, which is unlikely to represent a strong barrier to chemical modification of the underlying coat. The spore coat modification argues strongly against the use of solid particles during the treatment process. However, silica is well known in its colloidal form, and its formation can take place on the surface of the spores (It is different from what Dugway did using a pre-formed fumed silica in the study mentioned below.). The subunits of particles are typically in the range of 1 to 5 nm (the spore is about thousand times bigger). Whether or not a colloidal silica forms a gel-like structure depends on the conditions. The formation of colloidal silica can be generated by acidification of silicate salts. Therefore, (i) silica can coat the spore in a form different from sand-like particles, (ii) in a hypothetical scenario a perpetrator using, for example, a soluble silicate salt would be able to modify the spore coat underlying the exosporium.
Second, the hairy structure of the exosporium is likely to collapse upon drying. In the dry spores the exosporium and the coat are really close to each other. In this case it is not difficult to imagine that a silicon-containing compound bound to the coat may influence the fluidity, including the electrostatic charge. Sandia analyzed dry irradiated spores, and therefore it’d be rather difficult to distinguish between the outer coat and the exosporium layer.
Prof. Rosenberg
On the basis of [FBI] evidence, the attack spores must have been exposed to a high level of a Si compound, which was taken up into the spore coat by a natural process.
Comment
It is not clear what “natural” means in this context. The exposure to a compound was obviously artificial but the interaction with the spores obviously took place by a natural process. If “natural” implies the conditions present in the B. anthracis natural habitat, then the statement is incorrect. A chemical modification of the spores by the perpetrator may have had nothing in common with the conditions present in nature. I just agree that the soil origin of B. anthracis as a species is consistent with the “natural” capacity of the spore to uptake some small amount of silicates or other forms of silicon. However, all evidence indicates that the amount of Si in the spores from the letters is unnaturally high.
Prof. Rosenberg
Whether the exposure was unintentional or not remains to be determined. The FBI needs to find out what kinds of Si compounds can be incorporated into the spore coats of B. anthracis spores at the level observed; and what effects these compounds may have on the properties of spores that have been exposed to them.
Comment
At this point, I just don’t understand how the issue of intention may relate to Dr. Ivins? Can we imagine that the perpetrator had no intention to make a good powder but it just happened this way? Even if the answer is “yes”, what would be the conclusion? I guess the FBI may decide to test several hypotheses, but it is not its function to study all possible modifications of the spores. The primary question the FBI is expected to address is WHO did it but not HOW?
Prof. Rosenberg
There is an interesting possibility that the attack spores may have been grown using a microdroplet culture technique in which microdroplets of inoculated medium are isolated by coating them with hydrophobic silica particles. (21) This technique has the advantages of portability, growth to a high density, and minimal need to concentrate the spores. (22) It is noteworthy that the silica particles used for the technique must first be made hydrophobic by treating their surfaces with a siloxane (silicone oil) or a silane derivative.
Comment
This argument is purely hypothetical and implies a sophisticated generation of silica particles. It also ignores the basics of any perpetrator—keep a low profile, and opt for the simplest technique. The microdroplet cultivation activity is highly visible and not a part of a routine experimentation. USAMRIID denies the use of dry powders. Had anybody in USAMRIID been doing it anyway?
***
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.