Posted on 04/13/2008 8:20:52 AM PDT by ZacandPook
There is a 2007 GMU PhD thesis available on-line titled “An Analysis of the Potential Direct or Indirect Influence Exerted by an Al Qaeda Social Network on Future Biological Weapon Mission Planning.” I studied organizational behavior under H. Aldrich and was a big fan. He pioneered the field and now has applied it to small business ventures. I saw him recently acknowledged in some book relating to intelligence. For solving Amerithrax or avoiding the next 9/11, however, give me Rockford or Columbo anyday.
In her discussion of social network analysis, the PhD author usefully covers Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, PLO, Hezabollah and Al Qaeda. To not appreciate the Hamas connections to many of the same players would be to miss a lot. To not realize that Professor Frances Boyle, architect of a bioevangelist theory, was former counsel to PLO would miss even more. But I think to not address the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Egyptian Islamic Group separate is an unfortunate omission in the PhD given the influence of those organizations. It is, as they say, who you know that matters. Know not just enemy, but who he knew. To know who knew who, it does not help to subsume EIJ/IG within Al Qaeda because both far predate Al Qaeda.
Fitting WMD into a business model is not the road intelligence analsysis should go down. The most pertinent questions she asks get too scant attention. “Can Islam permit use of target?” “Will notification rules apply?”
We learn of Yazid Sufaat but nothing of Rauf Ahmad.
Of course, I would have preferred mention that the GMU’s DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense was housed in Discovery Hall and the man convicted of sedition and sentenced to life plus 70 was just feet from the leading anthrax scientist.
Such careful and well-done discussion (if you have an academic bent), however, is of great value to our subject and I urge Ed to link it. There are tidbits that will be entirely new to many readers, such as the passing mention of “Aris Sumarsono, alias Daud... a former biology student who replaced Hambali after arrest.” Or Abu Muhammad al Hilali who fills the role of that red-headed prolific WMD propagandist Setmarian who was captured.
There are additional names we’ll never remember (such as Wali Khan Amin Shah) but are worth reading about.
Moreover, those academically inclined always have read a lot. In studying the references she cites we might learn a lot, perhaps something very dramatic that enables to draw a connection that otherwise was missed.
Dr. Rebel, I checked out that novel you mentioned, CAMEL CLUB. The bioweapon had a drug leak from the pores of the artificial hand. I was put off Baldacci’s use of the name Mohammed al-Zawahiri right off as one of the bad guys. Reality is more interesting than fiction.
Ed,
Would you agree that the first mailing to the media had clearly visible silica?
(though in the media it commonly was referred to as debris) (It did)
And that the second mailing represented a refinement — that is, a removal of the silica? Such as by repeated centrifugation or an air chamber?
If I obtain and provide you with SEMS from the first mailing showing the silica would those SEMS be inconsistent with what you’ve argued for 5 years? Or would it be consistent.
Dr. Rebel,
Just because you imagine a cover-up and conspiracy, doesn’t mean that you are crazy. Doesn’t the documentary evidence establish both? Note that Al-Timimi, as I recall, was charged with a conspiracy. Finding an overt act was an element of the crime. (As I recall, he met with one fellow in September and told him to carry a magazine passing through the airport and if stopped, cry like a baby and ask for his mother). Conspiracy allegations are commonly used in complaints involving terrorism. So while Ed uses the term disparagingly, in fact, it is a key quiver in any US Attorney’s bow.
This thesis totally misses the key puzzle piece that most directly bears on social network analysis that applies. Ali Al-Timimi’s infiltration of the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense whose Director had a contract with USAMRIID involving Delta Ames.
http://u2.gmu.edu:8080/dspace/handle/1920/2881
An analysis of the potential direct or indirect influence exerted by an al Qaeda social network actor on future biological weapon mission planning
Baken, Denise N.. Proquest Dissertations And Theses 2007. Virginia: George Mason University; 2007. Publication Number: AAT 3284820.
Abstract (Summary)
The current conflict known as the “War on Terror” pits several sovereign states (United States and its Allies) against a non-state entity. This entity, al Qaeda, is a global social network with religious doctrine adherence as its declared locus. Terror experts agree that the economic and psychological damage al Qaeda inflicted on 9/11 is miniscule compared to the potential damage by a biological weapon. This dissertation is an analysis of the potential direct or indirect ability of al Qaeda members to select and use a biological weapon.
Excerpts:
“1. Introduction
When Osama bin Laden issued his August 23, 1996 Declaration of Jihad Against the United States and its Allies (Appendix A), he alleged that US/Western secular influences were detrimental to all Muslims and therefore a threat to Islam itself. While he made other points, including a need to create Muslim states governed by Islamic values and principles, his major thrust was to declare war on the West and its way of life.”
Comment: The Declaration of War prominently referenced al-Hawali, Al-Timimi’s religious mentor, who was on the telephone with him (according to Ali’s own lawyer) September 16, 2001 and September 19, 2001. Ali Al-Timimi was on the phone discussing recruiting young men with Bin Laden’s sheik 5 days after the US had been attacked and 3,000 innocent civilians had been killed in an attack.
She continues:
“Osama bin Laden is not the first to declare religious war on a value system
purportedly challenging the Islamic way of life. Twentieth century attempts to reclaim the governments of Middle East countries for Islam were recorded as early as 1928 when Hassan al-Banna started the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Hassan wanted to reduce the secular influences that proliferated in Egypt after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. He felt Islam was the appropriate counter to this European polity.
Comment: Indeed, Jaballah in Canada had EIJ military commander Mabruk he had recruited two Muslim Brotherhood members for operations.
“2.1.1 Muslim Brotherhood
To inculcate his message into Egyptian society, al Banna started schools that
taught the principles of Islam to the youth of Egypt. The Brotherhood then created charitable organizations and social clubs to reach all those who influence these youth. From these initiatives al Banna quickly moved to developing factories and building mosques to disseminate his message. It is in this latter organization, the mosques, that al Banna and the Brotherhood had their greatest success. Through the mosques, the Brotherhood influenced a cross-section of the population without interference from the
state because the mosques were deemed sanctuaries.”
She cites one of my favorite authors on these subjects.
Aboul-Enein, Youssef. (2007) Part III: Radical Theories on Defending Muslim Land through Jihad. West Point, NY http://www.ctc.usma.edu/Guest/Azzam_part_3.pdf
She points researchers to some possible sources of material:
“Terrorism data collection centers accessed included the International Institute for Counter Terrorism, West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center, the Air Force Counter Proliferation Center, and the University of Michigan’s Library Document Center. The Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA), the Council for Foreign Relations, the Hudson Institute and the Center, the International Institute for Counterterrorism provided interdisciplinary research information. Online magazines like
Kvali, and Islam Online offered additional perspective. The internet library Internet Archive offered limited access to al Qaeda videos, speeches and publications. It also provided access to significant historical Islamic texts. Additional sources of information were provided by referrals from individuals familiar with my research topic. One referral introduced me to the Mid-East Realities and Allaahuakbar.net.
She explains:
“Social network analysis is a computational tool that maps and measures the
relationships and information flows between people, groups, and organizations that constitute an information or knowledge processing system. Social network methods provide both visual and mathematical analysis of human relationships. Visualized as a
graphical network of nodes, this analysis tool illustrates connections through which individuals and groups operate in order to achieve their goals. Social network analysis merges aspects of sociology, anthropology and social psychology into organizational theory.”
Excerpt:
Table 2. Network Meta-Matrix38
Individuals Information/Capability Assets Assignment
Individuals Ties between agents;
network information;
chain of command information
Who knows what information and who has what capability
Who has what asset available for mission
Who is assigned what duty to accomplish mission
Information/Capability
Capabilities Matching Training to use assets appropriately
Training to use assets appropriately
Asset What assetscomplement each other
Assets needed to accomplish mission
Assignment Order and priority of missions
But she fails to address the most important aspect of any AQ WMD social network analysis — the one that begins with a picture showing Al-Timimi’s officein is not much more than 15 feet away from Ken and Charles. Sometimes a picture is worth the next 100,000 words.
The one circle in the picture above somewhere in this thread is Al-Timimi. The other circle is Dr. Bailey, former deputy commander (and for a couple months, Acting Commander) of USAMRIID. The lighter adjacent circle in the middle is Ken Alibek. I call that proximity analysis. One form of proximity analysis would involve the distance between the people. The other form would involve the distance to the hard drives containing key biochemistry information. Where did Dr. A and Dr. B keep such information? On their bookshelf? On their computer? At another secure location? Was their a vault such as there was at Ft. Detrick? Did they lock their door at night? Who did Ali know with drying expertise?
Isn’t the most pressing relevant “social network analysis” that needed to be done concern who was down the hallway? How was it okay for Ken to tell me in 2003 that he didn’t know anything about the charity background or Ali’s charity acquaintances? Wasn’t that precisely the mission and reason for existence of the US-taxpayer-funded Center? Wasn’t it the Center’s job to do this social network analysis in screening people who then would have close social network proximity with the Hadron and ATCC people? Finally, did both Dr. Bailey and Al-Timimi work at SRA International in 1999? If so, what did they do? Ali did mathematical support work for the Navy. What did it concern?
No, I would not agree that the first mailing contained silica.
The "debris" in the first mailing consisted of dead bacteria which failed to sporulate, the carcasses of the bacteria which DID sporulate, and possibly other typical debris such as dried nutrients. The debris is routine debris which will be present in ANY sporulation run.
A typical sporulation run will produce 90 percent sporulation debris and 10 percent spores. That is exactly what was in the media mailing.
There is absolutely NO reason for silica to be in the media mailing. The idea is preposterous.
And that the second mailing represented a refinement — that is, a removal of the silica? Such as by repeated centrifugation or an air chamber?
The second mailing represented the removal of the sporulation debris by filtering and centrifugation.
If there was silica in the first mailing, it would be totally INCONSISTENT with what I've been saying for 6 years.
The idea that the first mailing could have consisted of 10 percent spores and 90 percent silica without anyone ever mentioning it is crazy beyond belief.
If you have pictures of what was in the first mailing, I'd certainly like to see them. And I'd like to know how you determined that the "debris" was silica.
Forget quantification of the silica in the media mailing. But the unreported AFIP reports re the EDX for the media mailing show massive spikes for silica. Much bigger than in the Daschle/Leahy mailing. The AFIP apparently was being thorough in checking their findings.
(Much of the “debris” would have been growth debris.)
It seems that the reasonable inference is that in later processing the silica was removed.
As for percentages, one might be talking about the difference between 10%-20% and %1.
BTW, my source is a deep, deep, deep insider.
Makes Professor Meselson look like a tourist visiting the new crime museum in DC.
Thanks, Treble.
Hey, GMU! Now THAT’S pertinent “social network analysis” relating to bioweapons!
Sure. I may have forgotten to add two eggs in making Betty Crocker brownies this morning, but I have a complete box set of Rockford Files and have spent more time in the GMU library than these PhD candidates.
What are "unreported AFIP reports"? There's no report that AFIP ever touched the media anthrax. Preston's book only mentions them testing the Daschle anthrax.
Since there has been no report of exactly where the silicon and oxygen AFIP detected came from, I suppose it's quite possible that the silicon and oxygen that were detected in the Daschle anthrax could also be in the media anthrax.
But, it wouldn't be debris. It would be just like in the Daschle anthrax -- something absorbed into the spores AND possibly into the "growth debris" (i.e. the dead bacteria) during the fermentation or sporulation process.
It seems that the reasonable inference is that in later processing the silica was removed.
It seems more reasonable that when the sporulation debris was removed, the remaining spores had a different percentage of silicon and oxygen than the original "crude powder." That would indicate that the silicon and oxygen came from equipment used during the germination and sporulation processes, NOT from the washing, filtering and centrifuging processes done after the spores were formed.
As for percentages, one might be talking about the difference between 10%-20% and %1.
Whatever the percentage, it's meaningless without knowing where it came from. If it was in the "crude powder," that makes it a virtual certainty that it wasn't anything added to "weaponize" the spores.
Unfortunately, if everything he says has to be filtered through you, that makes it extremely unreliable. You're going to distort it to make it fit your beliefs, just as you always do.
As for percentages, one might be talking about the difference between 10%-20% and %1.
If any of this can be verified, it would be VERY interesting if the media powder had more silicon and oxygen than the Daschle powder.
As said before, it would make it a virtual certainty that the silicon and oxygen had NOTHING to do with weaponization.
It would probably mean that the "lab contamination" occurs in the fermenting step. The silicon and oxygen would be absorbed from the glass container (or it came already absorbed in the nutrients).
This would be VERY important "microbial forensics" evidence. Presumably, that kind of "lab contamination" is fairly rare, and it could pinpoint the exact type of equipment (or nutrients) used.
I hope you don't just continue to feed us information you have selected because you can twist it to fit your beliefs. There could be something very important in this, IF it can be shown to be reliable.
I'll be back again tomorrow morning.
By the phrase “unreported AFIP reports,” I meant to say internal scientific reports by AFIP that were not addressed in the write-up in the newsletter account. That newsletter, as you say, did not report on the testing done on the media anthrax (but which in fact was tested by AFIP).
Ed, can you link this excerpt on Amerithrax from the new Preston book? Thanks.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/excerpts/2008-05-12-Panic-in-Level-4_N.htm?csp=34
Security at USAMRIID was extremely tight. Even so, it was not as tight as it would become. That day in the commander’s office was some nine years before the anthrax terror attacks of the autumn of 2001, shortly after 9/11. The anthrax attacks came to be known as the Amerithrax terror event, after the FBI’s name for the case. Small quantities of pure, powdered spores of anthrax—a natural bacterium that has been developed into a very powerful bioweapon—were placed in envelopes and mailed to several media organizations and to the offices of two United States senators. Five people died after inhaling the spores, while others became critically ill; some of the survivors have never fully recovered. For the most part the victims, including African-Americans and recent immigrants to the United States, were low-level employees of the post of?ce who were just doing their jobs. No one has been charged with the Amerithrax crimes. The evidence suggests they were done by a serial killer or killers who intended to murder people and may have taken pleasure in causing the deaths while escaping punishment. The case remains open.
Officials at the United States Department of Justice named Steven Jay Hatfill, a former researcher at USAMRIID, as a “person of interest” in the case. Hatfill has never been charged with involvement in the crimes, though. At the same time, there was speculation in the news media that the exact strain of anthrax used in the attacks might have come out of an Army lab, even possibly from USAMRIID itself, where defensive medical research in anthrax had been going on for years. (The precise results of the FBI’s analysis of the anthrax strain have not been disclosed by the government, as of this writing.) USAMRIID scientists, in fact, played a key role in the forensic analysis of the anthrax that was collected from the envelopes.
Following the Amerithrax terror event, security at USAMRIID became astronomically tight. After that, it would have been useless for a journalist to ask to go into the space-suit labs. Back at the time when I was researching The Hot Zone, though, there was a slight amount of flexibility in the policy. On certain occasions, the Army had allowed untrained or inexperienced visitors to go into hot zones at USAMRIID. Unfortunately, as the commander explained to me, some of these visits had ended badly. People who were not familiar with space-suit work with hot agents had a tendency to panic in Level 4, he said.
Presumably, the testing of the media anthrax was done MUCH later, long after the clamp-down on giving information about evidence to the media.
Done. Not because you asked me, because the excerpt contains this interesting opinion from Preston:
No one has been charged with the Amerithrax crimes. The evidence suggests they were done by a serial killer or killers who intended to murder people and may have taken pleasure in causing the deaths while escaping punishment. The case remains open.
Since the evidence seems to suggest just the opposite, I thought that was an interesting thing for him to write.
No, the media anthrax was also analyzed at AFIP, just as Ross says. In their Newsletter they only talked about the silica they found in the Daschle sample. However, they also found silica in the media sample. Much more silica, in fact.
Did I say otherwise?
When Tom Geisbert visited AFIP on October 25, 2001, he took along ONLY a sample of the Daschle anthrax. If and when AFIP tested a media sample, it would have been later. Since there's no information about it, it could have been a day later or even a couple months later.
Presumably, however, they didn't SEE any "silica" in the media anthrax, either. They just DETECTED silicon and oxygen via their EDX.
If there was silicon and oxygen in the "crude powder" sent to the media, that almost certainly indicates that the silicon and oxygen came from some part of the fermenting process. It means it had NOTHING to do with weaponization.
I believe it was done at the same time as part of their desire to be thorough and confirm their results.
The polyglass binder has been confirmed by the FBI, according to Richard Spertzel and the addition of like-charges was confirmed by sources within the investigation, according to Richard Spertzel.
These techniques are not unique to bioweapons programs.
It appears you have read neither Preston’s book nor McClellan’s book.
As usual, your beliefs do not agree with the facts.
Preston's book is very specific about what happened on the 25th of October.
What difference does it make WHEN they checked the media anthrax? The only thing that is important is that it also contained silicon and oxygen. And since it was just a "crude powder," that means the silicon and oxygen most likely came from lab contamination during the fermenting process. It had NOTHING to do with weaponization.
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.