Posted on 07/01/2007 8:58:07 AM PDT by TrebleRebel
WASHINGTON — In the fall of 1992, Kanatjan Alibekov defected from Russia to the United States, bringing detailed, and chilling, descriptions of his role in making biological weapons for the former Soviet Union.
----------- Officials still value his seminal depictions of the Soviet program. But recent events have propelled questions about Alibek's reliability:
No biological weapon of mass destruction has been found in Iraq. His most sensational research findings, with U.S. colleagues, have not withstood peer review by scientific specialists. His promotion of nonprescription pills — sold in his name over the Internet and claiming to bolster the immune system — was ridiculed by some scientists. He resigned as executive director of a Virginia university's biodefense center 10 months ago while facing internal strife over his stewardship.
And, as Alibek raised fear of bioterrorism in the United States, he also has sought to profit from that fear.
By his count, Alibek has won about $28 million in federal grants or contracts for himself or entities that hired him.
The Los Angeles Times explored Alibek's public pronouncements, research and business activities as part of a series that will examine companies and government officials central to the U.S. war on terrorism -----------------------
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Yes, that’s what I said.
He talked to other people.
You said he was involved in the forensic examination of the product. He wasn’t. So I was merely correcting your inadvertent misstatement.
You may remember that I’m the one that went out of my way to get the statement and give it to you.
He did not say anything in those two sentences I disagree with. Indeed, my reason for getting it and distributing it was to point TrebleRebel to the fact that the presence of hydrophobic silica and polymerized glass is described in a commercially available patent issued by the fellow with the phone number the FBI suspects of being involved in the anthrax mailngs. Yes, it so happens that the inventors are leading anthrax experts from Russia and the US. But like Ken has always said, sometimes genius lies in making a sophisticated product using a relatively simple method.
Doug sent a copy of the article with the phrase “with compliments” which is FBI code for “You go, guy!”
Evidently, you aren't aware of it, but there is a difference between opinion and fact.
When Professor Meselson looked at the images of the Daschle anthrax and saw no additives, that wasn't an "opinion" about the powder, it was a statement of FACT of what he saw. The FACT that no additives were visible was supported by others, including Ken Alibek.
Tom Giesbert, who was the first to examine the powder under a Transmission Electron Microscope provided a picture of a "reference sample of pure anthrax spores" similar in character to what was in the Daschle letter. It doesn't look ANYTHING like the coated spores in the pictures I previously showed you.
Richard Preston describes what Geisbert saw this way:
The view was wall-to-wall anthrax spores. The spores were ovoids, rather like footballs but with more softly rounded ends. The material seemed to be absolutely pure spores.
There is no "opinion" that the spores were not coated. That is a FACT. There is only an idiotic "opinion" held by some that all the experts are not to be believed for one reason or another, and that the spores were coated.
What was that "wishy-washy, meaningless statement"? Do you have a reference?
And you see that as part of some sinister coverup of the facts?
Couldn't it just be that there is information that is important to the Amerithrax investigation (such as detecting traces of lab contamination in the anthrax) which should not be shared with anyone not directly involved in the investigation?
Now, the administration does retain the right to invoke executive privilege on many issues, but as far as I know, they have not explicitly invoked executive privilege regarding "Amerithrax".
Of course, these days the feds don't seem all that eager to share any information regarding "Amerithrax" at all with Congress, do they?
And you have to admit, that remains pretty gosh darn convenient for them, coming up on almost six years after the attacks, and nary an indictment, an arrest warrant, or even a "Wanted" poster anywhere in sight.
Ed is right.
TrebleRebel, your idea that the FBI should issue pronouncement about details relating to the method of weaponization of the anthrax has no basis in criminal or national security investigations. The idea that there is a cover-up because they withhold some information from Congressional staffers has no basis. Moreover, your understanding of the briefing is hearsay.
More importantly, just as Ed has played ostrich with Ken’s views of who did it, he similarly apparently does the same with Dr. Meselson. Since mid-October 2001, Dr. Meselson has said that pretty much nation states are the ones who can do this sort of thing. But he emphasized that these things are in the “minds” of the individual former US and Russian bioweaponeers. He has repeatedly said the Daschle product was “very, very pure.” So your suggestion that he is working to divert attention from a state program just has no basis in the record of his statements on Amerithrax. Instead, his focus likely would be on patents that lead to highly concentrated, “very pure” concentrations of biological agent that are the result of former US or Russian bioweaponeers. See patents above. Ed doesn’t get an expert opinion from Dr. Meselson saying the forensics don’t point to the patents above for good reason.
Here’s the wishy-washy statement. It says precisely nothing. What it does say is, in fact, total BS.
Here’s the letter:
http://abcnews.go.com/images/WNT/fbi_holt_letter092806.pdf
“Contrary to the assertions in your letter, the investigation into the anthrax attacks of 2001 has made significant progress and has been one of the largest and most complex investigations ever conducted.”
As to the new scientific study showing the anthrax used in 2001 to be less sophisticated than previously thought, the FBI wrote, “Since the earliest months of this investigation, we have consulted with the world’s foremost scientific experts on anthrax and relevant bio-forensic sciences, both inside and outside the FBI. While there have been erroneous media reports about the character of the 2001 anthrax, the FBI’s investigation has never been guided by such reports.”
That is clearly total BS. We had Mason admitting in September 2003 that the FBI failed to reproduce the senate powder (link below). That is hardly consistent with the BS letter to Holt above.
Of course since you usually read the complete opposite of what is written on this case, I assume you read the words “FBI succeeds to re-create anthrax production” instead of “FBI fails to re-create anthrax production”
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bioter/fbifailsanthrax.html
WASHINGTON — Two years after the nation’s deadly anthrax attacks, the FBI still has not been able to re-create the process the killer used to produce the substance sent through the U.S. mail, a top FBI official said Monday.
But Michael Mason, the new assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington field office, said testing has helped investigators “narrow” some aspects of the investigation and convinced them that the culprit has special expertise.
Director Mueller has explained that the reason Senators have not briefed is because of the fear that leaks will result in the flight of suspects and the intimidation of witnesses.
The information about silica being detected in fact was leaked and reported by Gary. M. (The same principle applies who was the source of the leak or their agency or branch of government).
Director Mueller reportedly was very angry. At the time it happened, they were intercepting Ali Timimi’s communications and suspected him of being involved in the anthrax mailings. See WP, October 2006 article. So the leak risked compromising the investigation given the patents involving the use hydrophobic silica to concentrate biological agents by Ken and the guy with Ali’s telephone number. The Alibek patent re silica did not issue until well after these issues first arose and so were not available to inform GM’s article. Without the benefit of those patents, his article was brilliant. Now, if you and he approached the issue with a fresh mind, and without the baggage of your hardened suppositions of misconduct on the part of others, you might be in a position to show that you were right (with just minor tweaking).
So for TrebleRebel to argue that more detailed information should have been leaked or disclosed is highly ironic.
Dr. Meselson and others have complimented the caliber of the young scientists working with the Task Force and numerous labs around the country have assisted in an unprecedented effort to develop the science. The suggestion that they need the help of outsiders is not well-founded given their large budget. Moreover, as Michael Mason once emailed Ed, the suggestion that there has been any sort of knowing “cover-up” is insulting.
They can say that again! And the dumbest of the "erroneous media reports" are the reports that a single failed test at Dugway meant that "The FBI failed to recreate" the attack anthrax powder, and that that somehow means that the anthrax powder was supersophisticated. That is just plain STUPID. That is probably why you believe it so thoroughly.
That is not what happened at all. We now know that from the December 4, 2006, issue of Chemical & Engineering News which contained this:
This September, Joseph Persichini Jr., acting assistant director of the FBI's Washington field office, acknowledged the major, if unheralded, role science is playing in the probe. Yet the FBI has said little about what science has revealed, citing the criminal nature of the case as its reason. What scientific tidbits the public has been fed come from media reports, and most of these have been incorrect or incomplete.
And particularly this:
Daniel Martin, a microbiologist in Dugway's Life Sciences Division, tells C&EN that Dugway was asked "to produce materials to see how they compared with the materials the FBI had in its possession." But, Martin says, Dugway did not reverse or back engineer the attack powder. "Back engineering implies that you know exactly what the material is and can replicate the material exactly, step by step." That isn't what Dugway did, he says.
Instead, Martin says, Dugway used the Leahy powder as the culture starter to "produce several different preparations using different media, and different ways of drying and milling the preparation" that the FBI could use for comparison purposes. Dugway, he says, never analyzed the Leahy powder and did no comparative analyses between the preparations made and the Leahy powder.
“What scientific tidbits the public has been fed come from media reports, and most of these have been incorrect or incomplete.”
That is complete nonsense. AFIP is NOT the media. Is that difficult for you to understand? Ari Fleisher is NOT the media. MJ John Parker is NOT the media.
The very fact that you distort the FACTS and pretend the silica additives are based on media mistakes illustrates your perverted agenda.
http://www.afip.org/images/public/nl081002.pdf
The AFIP lab deputy director, Florabel Mullick, said “This [silica] was a key component. Silica prevents the anthrax from aggregating, making it easier to aerosolize.
http://books.google.com/books?id=ZZV7BY-sFbIC&pg=PA203&ots=FLZA-xvr9s&dq=ari+fleischer+silica+anthrax&sig=ONjcffKAvF8U5ZI1uNkTIC1qLy8
The White House says there are chemical additives in that anthrax, including one called silica.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/10/20011029-4.html
We do know that we found silica in the samples.
“Director Mueller has explained that the reason Senators have not briefed is because of the fear that leaks will result in the flight of suspects and the intimidation of witnesses.”
Could you provide the URL for this alleged statement from Mueller - or is it just another of your imaginary quotes?
As I have told you before - the leaks made to the writer of the Science article did not come from senate staffers.
Parts of the Richard Preston description you conveniently omit:
10/25/01 Geisbert tests a sterilized sample of the Daschle anthrax. X-rays, and other tests show two materials present: silica and oxygen...glass.
“The silicon was powdered so finely that under Geisbert’s electron microscope it had looked like fried-egg gunk dripping off the spores.” Geisbert calls his boss, Peter Jahrling on a secure STU phone and says: “Pete ! There’s glass in the anthrax.”
...superfine powdered glass,known as silica nanopowder,which has industrial uses.The grains of this type of glass are very small.If an anthrax spore was an orange,then these particles of glass would be grains of sand clinging to the orange.The glass was slippery and smooth,and it might have been treated so that it would repel water.It caused the spores to crumble apart,to pass more easily through the holes in the envelopes and fly everywhere, filling the Hart Senate office building and the Brentwood and Hamilton mail-sorting facilities like a gas.”
General John Parker, at the time, expressly said they did not yet know the reason the silica was there.
It turns out that it was there because use of the hydrophobic nano-silica powder such as had become available in 2001 permitted greater concentration.
Greater concentration then led to “pure spores” (upon the silica eing removed) which by virtue of being pure spores had high flyability.
Pretty ironic, considering that it was almost certainly the FBI that illegally leaked Hatfill's name to the press. As far as the perps go, my personal opinion is that they probably fled a long time ago.
Of course, the possibility of leaks is an unfortunate reality in our government today, but this could be used as a justification for darn near just about anything that the executive branch is doing.
If members of Congress and/or their staffers do leak classified information in violation of their oaths of office, then in that case they can and should be prosecuted to the fullest possible extent of the law like anyone else.
But whet it comes to "Amerithrax", the Occam's Razor simple explanation for why they have completely clammed up is because they have nothing, and therefore they have nothing to say, and understandably don't want to admit it.
“It turns out that it was there because use of the hydrophobic nano-silica powder such as had become available in 2001 permitted greater concentration.”
Your opinion expressed by you as if it were accepted fact. I prefer the facts as given by AFIP.
http://www.afip.org/images/public/nl081002.pdf
The AFIP lab deputy director, Florabel Mullick, said “This [silica] was a key component. Silica prevents the anthrax from aggregating, making it easier to aerosolize.
Amazing thread. Everything I wanted to know about BioDefense, but was afraid to ask.
Bump to all posters.....
You were right. The forensics led in a beeline to the Alibek program and silica in fact was central to the correct analysis. So you and Gary get an A+ and so do stop hurling insults at the teacher, the principals and other pupils. Now that it has been laid out for you that you were right, you still are disagreeing — and assuming that when they said they didn’t see silica it means they were lying rather than just not seeing it because the silica was removed. Given the patent had not yet been published, Dr. Meselson would not even had reason to know of the method (beyond what other microbiologists like Henry were saying about repeated centrifugation being indicated).
Even when the facts are laid out totally plain, people are so caught up with their preconceptions that they are blind to them.
You have preconceived notions relating to DARPA contracting. Steve Morse was head of biological countermeasures and oversaw the work at GMU. Why don’t you ask him about these patents?
Yes, and as I said (with one typo but the meaning was clear) Director Mueller would have no less reason to be upset by the Science article regardless whether the agency or branch of the source — even if the leak came from a senior DOJ official.
And as for Ken being in an awkward position about silica being key to analysis, no duh. But that doesn’t mean he’s at fault. Or lying. The FBI did suspect him — they polygraphed him (along with 200 others).
Now I’ll get you the Mueller statement about the intimidation of witnesses. Now as for who we are talking about as being a murderous vengeful fanatic, it’s Ayman Zawahiri who has been responsible for the murder of hundreds of security officials a year. See recent history of Movement from the AQ spymaster that I posted on alt.security.terrorism a coup[le days ago. The same guy wrote at length about the Amerithrax investigation.
Hey Ed, I like your blog.
But you make a common research mistake by linking your news URLs back to your own blog, instead of to the original published link, or the reference commonly required for a reputable contribution to the academic body of research. You might want to consider updating your links to original publications to increase your level of journalistic or academic integrity. Use of PDF images are really not properly crediting your original sources.
BTW, how are your book sales going?
“Director Mueller has explained that the reason Senators have not briefed is because of the fear that leaks will result in the flight of suspects and the intimidation of witnesses.”
It wasn’t in the press conference in October 2005 he said that. That was when Director Mueller said that the FBI was pursuing all domestic and international leads. He said: “One cannot forget the Oklahoma City bombing. We have not forgotten the Oklahoma City bombing. One cannot forget 9/11. We have not forgotten 9/11.” “Mueller on Anthrax Probe” CBS News. (These motives involve a hatred of US policy — not a desire to “sound the alarm” as Ed imagines). That year, FBI agents visited Asia, Africa and Afghanistan in the course of the Amerithrax investigation.
Authorities had received information, for example, from at least one detainee at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, that there was an anthrax storage facility in the Kabul area. Amerithrax Agents checked the Kabul area in May 2004 but came up empty. Then in November 2004, on further information, agents had spent several weeks unsuccessfully searching an area in the Kandahar mountains, several hundred miles outside of Kabul.
Instead, I’m looking for Mueller’s December 6, 2006 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee to see if that is where he said it — on CSPAN. I likely would have sent you and Mr. Lake a copy of any LEXIS NEXIS transcript, I believe, of his testimony.
The next month, Attorney General Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 18, 2007:
“Senator, Director Mueller, I believe, has offered to get the chairman a briefing. And we’re waiting to try to accommodate the chairman’s schedule to make that happen.
We understand the frustration and the concern that exists with respect to the length of time. This is a very complicated investigation. I know that the director is very committed to seeing it to some kind of conclusion in the relatively near future.”
Badabing Badablonde.
I respectfully disagree, without questioning whether that is a wig. Citing to the original news link would result in Ed’s hundreds of news articles having links that are expired or broken. Then such stories would be lost, perhaps forever. Instead, he has made them available for us — and they are available even after the passage of 5 years. I’ve always found that he has scrupulously reproduced the full content of what he posts, and I’m his harshest critic — constantly urging him to include articles relevant to an Al Qaeda anthrax theory. (He tends to begrudgingly post much of it). People can do a quick google for the original link.
For example, it’s hard to get a ready link to Mueller’s October 2005 press conference precisely because Ed did not link it. (And that’s probably because we often miss things that don’t come down google news). And so the best link I can find is when on January 17, 2007 CBS happened to link it.
Ed may be wildly wrong on the whodunnit, and on the fact that silica was present, but everyone appreciates his tireless updating of news articles and his ongoing coverage of the Hatfill matter. It’s just that people tend to forget that the Hatfill matter is just a civil matter from 3-4 years ago — there still is Amerithrax to crack and Zawahiri is still threatening a massive attack against the US.
Hey, Ed, can you link Director Mueller’s October 2005 press conference as it is the best statement on the status of Amerithrax that there is, and your failure to link it is telling. (The printed summary did not include the important stuff.)
p.s. Badabing Badasomething else used to be TrebleRebel’s old pen name. So let’s not have a tag team on Mr. Lake.
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.
