Posted on 08/15/2008 6:43:33 PM PDT by Shermy
WASHINGTON —
...F.B.I officials say they are confident that their scientific evidence against Dr. Ivins, who killed himself last month as the Justice Department was preparing an indictment against him, will withstand scrutiny, and they plan to present their findings for review by leading scientists. But the scrutiny may only raise fresh questions.
The bureau presented forensics information to Congressional and government officials this week in a closed-door briefing, but a number of listeners said the briefing left them less convinced that the F.B.I. had the right man, and they said some of the government’s public statements appeared incomplete or misleading.
For instance, the Justice Department said earlier this month in unsealing court records against Dr. Ivins that he had tried to mislead investigators in 2002 by giving them an anthrax sample that did not appear to have come from his laboratory.
But F.B.I. officials acknowledged at the closed-door briefing, according to people who were there, that the sample Dr. Ivins gave them in 2002 did in fact come from the same strain used in the attacks, but, because of limitations in the bureau’s testing methods and Dr. Ivins’s failure to provide the sample in the format requested, the F.B.I. did not realize that it was a correct match until three years later.
In addition, people who were briefed by the F.B.I. said a batch of misprinted envelopes used in the anthrax attacks — another piece of evidence used to link Dr. Ivins to the attacks — could have been much more widely available than bureau officials had initially led them to believe.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Yes. Frankly, the FBI has been pretty bad for a long time, but it was really broken under Clinton, with criminal enablers promoted into the top ranks, and Mueller has done absolutely nothing to fix it. Apparently he likes it the way it is.
This anthrax story, has joined the JFK massacre class, no matter what we learn, we will never know if it is the truth.
The reportedly false allegation that he submitted a false sample was made in a sworn statement as recent as August 7, 2008. The Special Agent making the statement has been an agent for 3 years. (We’ve had lulls in the news of the investigation longer than that.) If you as a scientist was being falsely accused of having submitted a false sample — and they don’t believe your strident denials that you didn’t — might you be driven to suicide? When did they first learn that the false sample issue was incorrect? I expect Attorney Kemp to come out like a steamroller. The US DOJ might best start out with an apology BEFORE Kemp brings out the cannons. It is a consideration — how quickly action is taken after the error is discovered.
“”If you as a scientist was being falsely accused of having submitted a false sample — and they don’t believe your strident denials that you didn’t — might you be driven to suicide?””
Especially when you know you can’t prove the truth because the FBI “seized the flask”.
Who know what’s in that flask now. Or where it is.
I thought I followed the case closely...but backyard diggin allegation against Ivins? I missed that one.
The more I think about this...are all the documents released from court records? Can one sue the government on the basis that lies were made to judges in order to get warrants and this drove Ivins to suicide?
Good luck with that.
Since Dr. Ivins is dead, there is no way to refute whatever fancy lie the fibbies want to concoct. As over-exposed as Dr. Ivins has been in this debacle, I am sure that were he an avid fisherman that would have been reported.
The US DOJ should ahead of this and apologize ...
Like that will happen.
The only 'apology' that the DoJ or the rest of the alphabet soup have ever given have been after they've been caught and 'punished' with lawsuits; most of their perpetrators were advanced in paygrade, awarded honours, or allowed to retire -- with the taxpayers funding their 'apology'. The whole department needs to be overhauled from top to bottom, but that won't happen in this political climate.
Or did you forget about the Weavers from Idaho; Koresh and the members at Mt. Carmel 7DA Church; Limone, Salvati, Tameleo, Greco - all from Boston; and myriad others.
We've seen their 'apology'.
Apparently he worked with animals.
Maybe he dug up the worms to give the animals at work treats.
This other fellow submitting affidavits, making the same claim about a false sample being submitted, has been a Postal Inspector for 20 months. That affidavit was in mid-July. How would you refute such a claim? His life’s work, reputation and life as he knew it was over. These new inspectors and agents, I’m sure, did not first arrive at the conclusion that a false sample was submitted. It may have even predated their employment. What was the origin of the claim? Who made that assessment? That is what the briefing on Monday morning should address, along with explaining the strength of the genetic investigation which limits known isolates to 8 samples with 100 known people with access. But this false sworn claim made against Ivins is about the only thing that had powerfully incriminated him. It needs to be forthrightly addressed Monday morning.
I think the science is important,
but it’s also the palpable,
like the envelopes with the defect...how much wider than Virginia and Maryland post offices were they found. In New Jersey? How about New York City? (NY Post, Nguyen)
and,
also, microscopic photos of the attack anthrax should be given.
US Attorney Jeff Taylor said:
“Fourth, the affidavits indicate Dr. Ivins had engaged in behavior and made a number of statements that suggest consciousness of guilt. For example, one night shortly after a search warrant was executed on his house, Dr. Ivins took highly unusual steps to discard a book and article on DNA coding while under 24/7 surveillance. In addition, he had submitted a questionable sample of anthrax from his flask of parent spores to the FBI, presumably to mislead investigators.”
US Attorney Taylor may not appreciate that we are a bit non-plussed after authorities made such a hoo-hah over Dr. Hatfill putting things in his dumpster before his planned move to Louisiana. He expressly said: “In addition, he had submitted a questionable sample of anthrax from his flask of parent spores to the FBI, presumably to mislead investigators.” Now the New York Times is reporting that is not true. Either US Attorney should address and resolve this issue definitively or he should resign.
“Dr. Ivins took highly unusual steps to discard a book and article on DNA coding while under 24/7 surveillance.”
Such drama after they tore up his home!
Hatfill redux. Unusual dumping, check. But this time no Tinkerbell the Magic Sniffer Dog.
BTW, another thing—the FBI (or is it the postal inspectors) always spin that if these guys had an interest in the case, especially solving it, it makes them probably guilty. Hatfill, check. Ivins, check.
And most famously,
Richard Jewell, big check.
Absolutely. That was Ed’s theory in telling the FBI I was a terrorist. He said I thought of myself as a hero. Well, when I learned the reason the FDA was not recalling soft drinks that my lab showed had high levels of benzene, and found out that the FDA Commissioner Crawford had always known about it, had $62,000 in Pepsi stock and $78,000 in the food lunch company stock (which had not been disclosed, and he had previously been the industry’s chief advisor while advising the grocery manufacturer’s association), you can imagine it makes you want to do something heroic.
The FDA Commissioner resigned by email to everyone in his office Friday morning after I emailed him Wednesday afternoon (after getting his email from someone at Justice). But these facts never came out. He pled to two misdemeanors and no connections were drawn or explanation given as to why he resigned so precipitously. The US Attorney’s Office, politically minded, did not require that these facts come out in the allocution. ( Jeff Taylor the US Attorney used to be the advisor for Gonzalez.)
So I’m telling the DC US Attorney’s Office, put things in order on Monday at 9 a.m. and be very forthright about all issues. Your science on the mixed strains and inverted plasmid is very sound. Don’t screw that up by sloppy shoe leather work and new investigators and agents. Big picture, it has been the compartmentalization that has been part of the problem just as Lambert said it would be. If Director Mueller had just required a proper leak investigation in 2002, there would not have been the continued leaks by Seikaly in 2003. (His daughter now represents anthrax weapons suspect Ali Al-Timimi bono). So put your house in order ASAP because there are those, conservatives and liberals alike, who are activist on the issue of good and honest government. And if there are Special Agents who want to profile people because they want to save the world, screw them. Or at least let me take them out to lunch.
It’s called self-actualization in Maslow’s hierachy.
Returning to the merits, what was the biological pathogen that it is claimed in an anonymous leak that Aafia Siddiqui wanted to use in poisoning former Presidents? Are the US Al Qaeda operatives she has named to authorities getting a bit nervous?
The FBI PR machine is now prepared to roll out this piece of equipment — a SpeedVac — in urging that Ivins was the culprit. Battle stations, everyone.
August 8, 2008
Ex-colleague questions government’s case against anthrax suspect
By ANDREW SCHOTZ (andrews@herald-mail.com
http://www.herald-mail.com/?cmd=displaystory&story_id=200518&format=html
Ivins’ alleged use of a lyophilizer to make powdered anthrax. Ulrich said Ivins signed out a SpeedVac, but not a lyophilizer, which is too large to fit in a containment hood, or secure protective area.
She said it would take about an hour to dry one milliliter of wet anthrax spores in one vial in a SpeedVac. It would have been impossible for Ivins to have dried more than a liter, which would have been required for the amount of anthrax sent in the letters, in the time frame they were mailed, Ulrich said.
Ulrich was a principal investigator in the diagnostic systems division at USAMRIID.
The microbial vac is a US-Army funded device that existed in prototype at the time that concentrated anthrax samples by a factor of 10 (to a trillion spores) while sequentially filtering the sample. It can only be used for weaponization on a small scale, its inventor tells me. Here is a video explaining the advantages of the Speed Vac which the US DOJ mistakenly thinks was used.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hvJOZCCm_M
Freeze Dryer vs. Speed Vac
http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/proteins/2003-March/011065.html
His screen names included
KingBadger7@aol.com
goldenphoenix111@hotmail.com
jimmyflathead@yahoo.com
EdIvings
BigSky
prunetacos
Forgive me if this has already been done. I was on vacation when the story broke. But has anyone studied, perhaps using the Wayback Machine if necessary, what posts he made in September 2001 and October 2001?
Aafia reportedly wanted to kill former presidents using a biological agent in their drinks. She was married to the fellow helping the 911 hijackers in association with al-Hawsawi, KSM’s assistant. Al-Hawsawi had anthrax spraydrying documents on his computer. Are other US operatives going to be indicted with her in an amended indictment?
An Assistant United States Attorney once said in federal court, in the Paracha trial opening argument, that Aafia was willing to help with an anthrax attack if asked. What biological agent had she wanted to use to kill the former Presidents? If she hasn’t told her lawyers where she’s been for the past 5 years, or at least lent some clarity, is it because she is cooperating with authorities?
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=130532
Still grey
8/18/2008
The Grey Lady of Bagram has become the Grey Lady of New York. Since Aafia Siddiqui appeared in a US court we have learned little more about her or the circumstances in which she lived during her ‘missing’ years — than we knew before. We do not know if she was in the custody of any country or agency or whether she was quietly keeping a low profile knowing that assorted American agencies were keen to have a quiet chat with her in-between sessions with the waterboard. We do not know where her children are — although there seems to be an assumption in some sections of the press that they are in America. We also do not know if she was tortured, as a careful reading of the statement by one of her lawyers, Elizabeth Fink, reveals…”The woman has been tortured. I believed she has been tortured based on my experience with people with post-traumatic stress disorder.” This is not the same as saying ‘Aafia Siddiqui has been tortured.’
There is a world of difference between Ms Fink believing she was tortured and Ms Siddiqui saying so. The lawyers, of which there seem to be no shortage, are also keen not to reveal anything about the whereabouts of the missing children. We know that she had a young male child with her when she was allegedly arrested in Ghazni. We do not conclusively know that it was her own child and we do not know what happened to the boy since he was last seen. We know that she is injured but we do not know the precise nature of her wounds and we do know that she has — finally — been seen by a female doctor. We know that she has been visited by a Pakistani consular representative but that this is something of an irrelevance as her prosecution appears to be as an American citizen — she holds dual nationality. (Those of her children born in the US will automatically have American citizenship. It is unclear if any of them are Pakistani nationals as well.) We also know that her lawyer told her to say nothing - beyond confirming who she was — to the Pakistani consular representative; especially about the children.
We know, then, remarkably little in purely factual and objective terms about a woman who it many commentators presume to know so much. And not only the commentators — the Internet, natural home to every hue and stripe of conspiracy theorist — is awash with tales of Aafia Siddiqui, all of them unsubstantiated and unsourced. The Grey Lady of Bagram, the ghostly Prisoner 650, is no more substantial to us than she was when she made her reappearance on 17th of July in circumstances yet far from clear themselves. She is due in court again on September 3, but whether we will learn anything more or new about this very grey affair is very much a matter for conjecture.
A different friend emails what serves in substance as a rebuttal to the point made by Dr. Melanie Ulrich, Ivins colleague. She and other experts should be contacted to see if they agree. He is oft-quoted and has a distinguished University position.
“Two points :
“(1) A SpeedVac, when coupled to a dry ice trap or condenser (the
configuration most frequently encountered in biomedical research labs),
functions as a lyophilizer. (In many, if not most, cases in which
post-1980s biomedical research papers state that a sample was “lyophilized,”
the papers refer to use of a SpeedVac.)
“(2) 1-4 g of wet bacterial cells or spores occupies a volume less than 5
ml.
(A 1 liter culture presumably would be required to produce 1-4 g of dried
bacterial cells or spores...but more than 99.5% of the 1 liter starting
volume first would be removed, in seconds to minutes, by decanting,
centrifugation, or filtration, leaving less than 0.5% of the 1 liter
starting volume to be dried.)
In short:
(1) SpeedVac = lyophilizer.
(2) If it would take 1 h to process a 1 ml sample, then it would take 1 h to
five 1 ml samples (since a SpeedVac, as most frequently configured, holds,
and simultaneously processes, up to 1 ml samples), and thus it would take 1
h to dry sufficient spore paste to yield 1-4 g of dried spores.
Here are some URLs relevant to the 2 P.M. briefing.
If I were a science writer there, I would ask for their explanation of what the FBI calls the “silicon signature,” the issue of isotope ratios (which MSNBC indicated that the culture had been grown in the Northeastern United States), and the issue of subtilus contamination.
On the issue of the genetic inquiry, the key take-how is that it narrowed it only to 8 known isolates (at how many labs, 4?), and 100 known people KNOWN to have access. The phrasing “sole custodian” as to Ivins in the FBI affidavits creates a misleading impression. He was the “sole custodian “ of the flask but not of the stream of genetically identical isolates downstream from the flask. The flask did not have a silicon signature. The flask did not have subtilus contamination.
Investigation of Bioterrorism-Related Anthrax, United States, 2001: Epidemiologic Findings,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0353.htm
“First Case of Bioterrorism-Related Inhalational Anthrax in the United States,” Palm Beach County, Florida, 2001, Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0354.htm
“First Case of Bioterrorism-Related Inhalational Anthrax, Florida, 2001: North Carolina Investigation,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0389.htm
“Opening a Bacillus anthracis–Containing Envelope, Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C.: The Public Health Response,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0332.htm
“Inhalational Anthrax Outbreak among Postal Workers, Washington, D.C., 2001,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0330.htm
“Bacillus anthracis Aerosolization Associated with a Contaminated Mail Sorting Machine,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0329.htm
“Epidemiologic Investigations of Bioterrorism-Related Anthrax, New Jersey, 2001,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0322.htm
“Surveillance for Anthrax Cases Associated with Contaminated Letters, New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, 2001,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0399.htm
“Bioterrorism-Related Anthrax Surveillance, Connecticut, September–December, 2001,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0398.htm
“Environmental Sampling for Spores of Bacillus anthracis,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0355.htm
“Call-Tracking Data and the Public Health Response to Bioterrorism-Related Anthrax,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0390.htm
“Coordinated Response to Reports of Possible Anthrax Contamination, Idaho, 2001,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0390.htm
“Bioterrorism-Related Anthrax: International Response by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, October 2002
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol8no10/02-0345.htm
Beecher, Douglas J., “Forensic Application of Microbiological Culture Analysis To Identify Mail Intentionally Contaminated with Bacillus anthracis Spores,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Aug. 2006, p. 5304-5310
Bowen, G. J., J. R. Ehleringer, L. Chesson, E. Stange, and C. E. Cerling. 2007. “Stable isotope ratios of tap water in the contiguous USA,” Water Resour. Res. 43:W03419.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006WR005186.shtml
Budowle B, Harmon R., “HIV legal precedent useful for microbial forensics,” Croat Med J. 46(4):514-21 (Aug 2005).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=16100753&ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Budowle, B., M. D. Johnson, C. M. Fraser, T. J. Leighton, R. S. Murch, and R. Chakraborty. 2005. “Genetic analysis and attribution of microbial forensics evidence,” Crit. Rev. Microbiol. 31:233-254.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=16417203&dopt=AbstractPlus
Budowle B, Murch R, Chakraborty R., “Microbial forensics: the next forensic challenge,” Int J Legal Med. 119(6):317-30 (Nov 2005).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=15821943&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Budowle, B., S. E. Schutzer, M. S. Ascher, R. M. Atlas, J. P. Burans, R. Chakraborty, J. J. Dunn, C. M. Fraser, D. R. Franz, T. J. Leighton, S. A. Morse, R. S. Murch, J. Ravel, D. L. Rock, T. R.
Slezak, S. P. Velsko, A. C. Walsh, and R. A. Walters. “Toward a system of microbial forensics: from sample collection to interpretation of evidence,” Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71:2209-2213 (2005).
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/71/5/2209?ijkey=11f63da16d84d14221469a04d0917d00b4ae7e74&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
Budowle, B., S. E. Schutzer, A. Einseln, L. C. Kelley, A. C. Walsh, J. A. L. Smith, B. L. Marrone, J. Robertson, and J. Campos. Building microbial forensics as a response to bioterrorism. Science 301:1852-1853 (2003).
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/301/5641/1852?ijkey=6c5eda5d0b0d4dec11807281f555d5087c756235&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
Cliff, J. B., K. H. Jarman, N. B. Valentine, S. L. Golledge, D. J. Gaspar, D. S. Wunschel, and K. L. Wahl, “Differentiation of spores of Bacillus subtilis grown in different media by elemental characterization using time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry,” Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71:6524-6530 (2005)
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/71/11/6524?ijkey=8feb323b80876abedc9727959678c8b67e431489&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
Horita, J., and A. A. Vass, “Stable-isotope fingerprints of biological agents as forensic tools,” J. Forensic Sci. 48:122-126 (2003)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=12570211&dopt=AbstractPlus
Keim et al., “Microbial forensics: DNA fingerprinting of Bacillus anthracis (anthrax),” Analytical Chemistry, 2008 Jul; 80 (13): 4791-9
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/ancham/80/i13/html/0708feature_keim.html
Kreuzer-Martin, H. W., L. A. Chesson, M. J. Lott, J. V. Dorigan, and J. R. Ehleringer, “Stable isotope ratios as a tool in microbial forensics. 2. Isotopic variation among different growth media as a tool for sourcing origins of bacterial cells or spores,” J. Forensic Sci. 49:961-967 (2004).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=15461095&dopt=AbstractPlus
Kreuzer-Martin, H. W., L. A. Chesson, M. J. Lott, and J. R. Ehleringer, “Stable isotope ratios as a tool in microbial forensics. 3. Effect of culturing on agar-containing growth media,” J. Forensic Sci. 50:1372-1379 (2005).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=16382831&dopt=AbstractPlus
Kreuzer-Martin, H. W., M. J. Lott, J. Dorigan, and J. R. Ehleringer, “Microbe forensics: oxygen and hydrogen stable isotope ratios in Bacillus subtilis cells and spores,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:815-819 (2003).
http://www.pnas.org/content/100/3/815.abstract?ijkey=fab4cbbab441ba7dff87548c7f41866771a131bb&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
J.B. Petro, and D.A Relman, “Understanding Threats to Scientific Openness, Science, December 12, 2003
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/sci;302/5652/1898/DC1
Shoham, Dany & Jacobsen, Stuart “Technical Intelligence in Retrospect: 2001 Anthrax Letters Powder,” International Journal for Intelligence and Counterintelligence, October 2006
Wahl, K. L., N. B. Valentine, S. C. Wunschel, D. S. Wunschel, K. H. Jarman, and C. E. Petersen. Microorganism analysis and identification by MALDI-TOF-MS. Abstr. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc. 226:U121 (2003).
Wunschel, D. S., E. A. Hill, J. S. McLean, K. Jarman, Y. A. Gorby, N. Valentine, and K. Wahl. Effects of varied pH, growth rate and temperature using controlled fermentation and batch culture on matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization whole cell protein fingerprints. J. Microbiol. Methods 62:259-271 (2005).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=15979749&dopt=AbstractPlus
Wunschel, S. C., K. H. Jarman, C. E. Petersen, N. B. Valentine, K. L. Wahl, D. Schauki, J. Jackman, C. P. Nelson, and E. White. Bacterial analysis by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry: an inter-laboratory comparison. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 16:456-462 (2005).
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=15792714&dopt=AbstractPlus
It’s my understanding that they are not taking questions this afternoon. So perhaps no one will have a chance to ask: what was the origin of the false claim that a false sample had been submitted (which would drive any sane man to suicide given it represented the destruction of his career, reputation and life’s work).
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.