Posted on 08/07/2008 11:49:06 AM PDT by Shermy
WASHINGTON — The Federal Bureau of Investigation on Wednesday outlined a pattern of bizarre and deceptive conduct by Bruce E. Ivins, an Army microbiologist who killed himself last week, presenting a sweeping but circumstantial case that he was solely responsible for mailing the deadly anthrax letters that killed five people in 2001.
After nearly seven years of a troubled investigation, officials of the F.B.I. and the Justice Department declared that the case had been solved. Jeffrey A. Taylor, the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, said the authorities believed “that based on the evidence we had collected, we could prove his guilt to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Lawyers for Dr. Ivins reasserted their late client’s innocence and criticized the government for presenting what they called “heaps of innuendo” that failed to link him directly to the crime and would never have to be tested in court. “It was an explanation of why Bruce Ivins was a suspect,” said Paul F. Kemp, who represented the scientist for more than a year before his death on July 29 at age 62. “But there’s a total absence of proof that he committed this crime.”
The conflicting views of Dr. Ivins emerged in a day of emotional crosscurrents. At a morning memorial service at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., weeping Army scientists praised Dr. Ivins as a beloved colleague “known for his patience and enthusiasm for science,” as a written program put it. At the same time, at F.B.I. headquarters in Washington, the F.B.I. director, Robert S. Mueller III, and bureau officials were explaining to survivors of the anthrax attacks and relatives of the five people who died why they believe Dr. Ivins was a mass murderer.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I’ll take door number 3 for $500.
>>>After nearly seven years of a troubled investigation, a guy kills himself and it turns out he’s completely to blame and acted alone.
He may not have killed himself on purpose. He O.D.ed on Tylenol. That is not hard to do; especially since he was mentally unstable either by stress or medial history.
bump
or by accident
>>>I’m beginning to wonder if they knew he was depressed and suicidal and intentionally drove him into the ditch.
Apparently, the therapist, with a criminal background, was giving the FBI progress notes on Ivins.
>>>You don’t just whip up a batch of sedatives,scarf it down, and hope for the best.
Gene, it was Rx Tylenol. No whipping up required.
>>>Postal Inspector: Anthrax suspect had communist ties
>>>>>>>So does Barack Obama
I would use ‘has’.
From USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-08-13-anthrax_N.htm?csp=34
WASHINGTON — Former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, whose Senate office received the first anthrax-tainted letter in 2001, says he is satisfied the FBI has found the culprit.
Daschle, a former Democratic senator from South Dakota, called the Justice Department’s case against Bruce Ivins, an anthrax scientist at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md., “complete and persuasive.”
“I think the evidence is pretty compelling,” he told a group of reporters at USA TODAY’s Washington bureau.
...
The most compelling evidence Daschle heard was that the DNA “fingerprint” of the anthrax could be traced to a flask controlled by Ivins.
“That’s as close to a smoking gun as I think you’re going to get,” Daschle said.
_____________________________________________________
The best thing about this article, the title,
“Daschle buys Ivins as sole culprit in 2001 anthrax attacks”
I think there’s some editorial disapproval in “buys”
May-be to remind people of Unabomber Ted Kaczynski when revealed that hairs are not of Ivins?
'Kaczynski described in his writings how he placed two human hairs he found in a bus station into a bomb "to deceive the policemen, who will think that the hair belongs to whoever made the device," KPIX reported.'
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/29/national/main2213782.shtml
Nagging Questions in the Anthrax Case Wednesday, Aug. 13, 2008 By LAURA FITZPATRICK Time Magazine
As probable bioterrorists go, Bruce Ivins was a near-perfect suspect. Among the hundreds of pages of evidence that the FBI had mounted against him and released last week, there were electronic records documenting Ivins' late-night sojourns in the lab, e-mails revealing a mind wracked by paranoia, and an inventory of a November 2007 FBI search of his home, which turned up a paperback copy of Albert Camus' novel, The Plague. [I don't think she's being sarcastic]
....Anthrax experts interviewed by TIME point to the peculiarities of anthrax research that underscore why it is critical that the FBI's methodology be evaluated. Most important is that anthrax has historically been shuttled freely around the world — a fact that the FBI has not explicitly accounted for. Until the security crackdown that followed the 2001 attacks, most labs readily sold anthrax strains — including the type linked to Ivins — to scientists doing research in other parts of the world. "Bruce, like most people in the lab, derived most of his strains from outside sources," says Jeffrey Adamovicz, a former bacteriology chief who worked with Ivins at Fort Detrick's U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) for 12 years. If the FBI has not investigated every one of those possible sources, in other words, it can't be certain that the path to Ivins is solid. No one but the FBI knows for sure....
...While even the staunchest critics of the FBI acknowledge that publicizing details about new technology may pose a national security risk [WARNING: FIRST HINT OF USE OF "NATIONAL SECURITY" EXCUSE TO NOT REVEAL DNA TESTINGS], others insist that doing so and hastening a firm conclusion to the "Amerithrax" case would only make the country safer. "To know what challenge you're defending against is terribly important," says Henderson. Further, the FBI's technology may prove useful for other "benign reasons," such as in vaccine research or in legal investigations involving poisoning, says Adamovicz... ...Holt, a former assistant director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory and the only scientist to sit on the House Intelligence Committee, expects the hearings to spark broader debate about the way the government handles certain scientific issues, including policy questions — such as how to ensure lab security — and a general attitude regarding the scientific method. "[The FBI] try to confirm their hunches, whereas a scientist tries to refute his or her own conclusions," says Holt. "The whole point of science is to publish it, so that other people can tear it apart."
There is so much NJ local media material that absolutely does not fit into the Ivins scenario. If we are to believe the Princeton Greek Society were connected, then why did the FBI trace photo copies of the letters to Rutgers? There was suppose to be a specific copy machine that made a marking that matched something. They were close to something. Then, all of a sudden, out of no where, they were draining a pond in another state.
I think we've been through this a couple dozen times a half dozen years ago.
Would you rent an apartment next door to someone
who was producing aerosolized anthrax that floated like smoke
under a hood on a small scale?
You didn't answer last time I asked.
Please answer this time.
I don't know if you ever have done an experiment in your life.
But try this one:
Try smoking a cigarette or cigar under a hood
on a small scale
and make sure not one particle of smoke escapes.
(One floating particle of anthrax is sufficient to kill someone)
You give me $100,000 if you are not successful.
Do you take me on?
(I think I asked you that one once before, too)
Forget about 'my friend'.
I'm just asking you to get real.
(Sorry if the need for a BL4 lab doesn't conform to your theories)
“Apparently, the therapist, with a criminal background, was giving the FBI progress notes on Ivins.”
Which should be a complete violation of what it means to be a “therapist”. Except she wasn’t truly a “therapist” at all was she?
I remember the stories about central Jersey, and copiers, but never that they found a match.
I asked:
“why couldn’t be done under a hood on a small scale?”
You responded.
“I think we’ve been through this a couple dozen times a half dozen years ago.”
Allan, I realize you have someone at Porton Down who is expert on such an issue and realize you don’t make the point casually. As for published reports, I will gather up the names of 5 scientists who say a BL-3 is sufficient for everyone you name who thinks a BL-4 is sufficient. Then we can weed out from my list any who you persuade me are not qualified to speak to the question (by reason of lack of experience). I’m sure many quoted experts are speaking beyond their learning on the subject. I would even be glad to contact the Porton Down scientist you name to explain to her what is published about the views of these other experts. My view of ATCC and the Center for Biodefense, coioncidentally, are from someone with BL-4 experience who called me and said that Ali had unrestricted access to ATCC facilities given ATCC co-sponsored his program and so there are BL-4 people I could call.
My personal answer is that it was charged AFTER insertion into the envelope — but that’s so cutting edge and top secret that I had to make it up without the benefit of a credentialed expert. I make the offer of cited expertise only on the debate generally of BL-3 versus BL-4. And I’d also be glad to contact anyone you like for emailed confirmation their view hasn’t changed. I’m always open to learning something but can’t rely on some web poster’s unsupported assertion.
I think Mr. Redacted from TrebelRebel’s email may prove to be from Battelle rather than Ft. Detrick, which would be a powerful point and consistent with what you are argue assuming Battelle has a BL-4. If you are right, it may be the key to understanding the whole case. Catherine Herridge knows this and should press on the point.
Who did have a BL-4 at the time? Plum Island? — which Ft. Detrick people were asked about in early polygraphs. Who else?
Perhaps the minimum requirement for an expert should be that they’ve worked in a BL-3. (A judge otherwise would exclude their testimony upon a motion to strike).
I didn’t mean Porton Down. I meant Suffield in Canada. And of course I may be mistaken on that also. You haven’t named an expert.
I do not ‘have’ anyone at Porton Down who is an expert.
Please list the 5 experts who think BL3 is sufficient.
I’d be especially interested to know if William Patrick is one of them.
or Spertzel.
Do you know his opinion?
My consulting scientist is a military scientist who makes anthrax simulant on an ongoing basis. I’ve emailed him. My guy has sent me the forensics showing that his lab can make it and it performs with comparable parameters. I doubt they have a BL-4 but I can ask. (If they did, he would have mentioned it).
Spertzel is a veterinarian who says he couldn’t make it and it would take a year with a large staff to be able to try to make it. I credit his statement he doesn’t know how to make it.
My consulting military scientist says the March 14, 2001 biochemistry patent I rely on relating to concentrating anthrax using silica — that Ali had access to — is a weaponization patent useful in increasing the viability of a wide variety of pathogens. But my friend and consulting military scientist says look for siliconizing solution rather than silica.
As for Patrick and Alibek’s views, I relied on the discussion of the reason for the FBI’s wavering on silica in a PhD thesis that they advised. The woman, as I’ve explained previously, was a couple doors down from Ali al-Timimi. She explains the method. I never thought to ask Dr. Crockett BL-3 or BL-4.
I have frequently consulted with Dr. Alibek but don’t recall that I’ve ever asked him that precise question. We would speak over the years about the equipment used. While I fully expect that Mr. Redacted will turn out to be either Patrick or Alibek, I do not suspect them for a minute. Not for a second.
I now understand that you are not relying on an expert and have not consulted with any expert. Okay.
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.