"Investigators also failed to uncover other critical evidence linking Ivins directly to the letters. For instance:
No textile fibers were found in his office, residence or vehicles matching fibers found on the scotch tape used to seal the envelopes;
No pens were found matching the ink used to address the envelopes;
Samples of his hair failed to match hair follicles found inside the Princeton, N.J., mailbox used to mail the letters.
Also, no souvenirs of the crime, such as newspaper clippings, were found in his possession as commonly seen in serial murder cases.
What’s more, the FBI could not place Ivins at the crime scene with evidence, such as gas station or other receipts, at the time the letters were mailed in September and October 2001."
Another FBI fubar was redacting a line out of Ivan's email.
There's simply nothing about national security worthy of a redaction from a dead "suspect."
Anything to stop the story that foreign terrorists used a WMD on Americans...
Who was stopping "the story that foreign terrorists used a WMD on Americans"? And why?
Most conspiracy theorists claim the attacks were part of a conspiracy to persuade America that foreigners were behind the attacks.
You're claiming it was a conspiracy to persuade America that it was NOT foreigners?
How many tens of thousands of people were involved in this conspiracy? Obviously, it must have included the entire FBI, the entire Justice Department, all the scientists who helped the FBI, and, presumably, both the Bush administration and the Obama administration. Why would they all do what you claim?
Ivins didn't become a key suspect until 2005 or so, FOUR YEARS after the attacks. Do you still have the scotch tape you bought four years ago?
Do you always shed hair into a mailbox when you mail a letter?
Ivins wasn't a "serial killer." He was a mass murderer. But, how do you know he didn't save the originals of the letters? How do you know he didn't save the irregular edges he trimmed off the letters? He put a hidden message in the letters that he knew how to decode. He threw away the "code books" when the FBI started closing in. He could have thrown away the original letters and trimmings years earlier, when he told the FBI he wouldn't talk with them without having his lawyer present.
Information redacted from Ivins' emails typically isn't about Ivins. It's about innocent people who had nothing to do with the case.
Is that it?