Anthrax scientists under microscope (Hatfill or al-Haznawi – Who did it?)

Sydney Morning Herald ^ | August 10 2002 | Caroline Overington

[dead]

Herald Correspondent Caroline Overington reports from Washington on a key strand of America's anthrax investigation.

It is not easy to kill people with anthrax. Not, at least, without killing yourself in the process. The stuff is so lethal that the FBI thinks only 20 people in the United States would know how to handle it.

Martin Hugh-Jones is one of those people. As a professor of veterinary medicine at Louisiana State University, he is an expert on the disease and, ever since somebody sent it through the mail last October and killed five people, he has been wondering how it was done.

"I think I know a way," Professor Hugh-Jones said.

"Let's speak hypothetically. It's 6am on a cool day, with no wind. You could go into your garden and, provided there was only a slight breeze, running from left to right, but not from behind, because that would create turbulence, I think you could open the jar.

"Once you'd done that I think you could stick one of those wooden spatulas you get in coffee shops into the jar, scoop some out and tip it off, into an envelope. Then you'd have to seal the envelope, using a wet cotton ball; you wouldn't want to put your face near the envelope. Some of it would get airborne, for sure, but provided you hosed everything down, provided you really knew what you were doing, I think you'd be OK."

It sounds simple, but it's really complicated enough to be deadly.

"Handling anthrax is very difficult," Professor Hugh-Jones said. "And whoever killed those people had access to good quality, fine anthrax in powder form, and there would be only six to a dozen people in the United States with access to that."

Professor Hugh-Jones says he is not one of them. He nevertheless suspects the FBI is keeping an eye on him while it continues a year-long investigation into the letters laced with anthrax. "They record my calls," he said, and he is also sure that the FBI is reading his email. "I don't mind. They don't think I did it. They are just interested in what I think."

And what is that?

"Well, basically, I agree with the FBI. I think it must be somebody with scientific knowledge."

And would one of those people be his colleague, Steven Hatfill? Professor Hugh-Jones will not say.

"I have never met the man. If you have questions about that, you will have to ask him."

That, unfortunately, is impossible. Dr Hatfill does not speak to journalists. Not any more, anyway. He used to talk about anthrax all the time, but that was before he became a "person of interest" in the FBI's investigation into the letters that were sent to reporters and politicians in the tense months after the September 11 terrorist attacks. The dust escaped from the envelopes, infecting 18 people. Five of them, including two postal workers, died.

The FBI's investigation into the case, and into Dr Hatfill, appeared until recently to have stalled. Then, in a flurry of activity that coincided with the looming first anniversary of the first death, the bureau suddenly took bloodhounds into his flat to try to find evidence to link him to the crime.

The bureau's interest in Dr Hatfill was prompted early in the case, by his interesting resume, which shows he was born in St Louis but that he got his medical degree at a university in Zimbabwe, then called Rhodesia, in the 1970s. Dr Hatfill claims to have fought black rebels during the civil war there. (Curiously, the world's largest outbreak of human anthrax occurred from 1978 to 1980 in rural Southern Rhodesia, where 10,738 cases were recorded and 182 people died. There is evidence that this outbreak was the result of covert action by Rhodesian security forces.)

Dr Hatfill also has access to anthrax, and is vaccinated against it. About two years ago he took a job at the US Army's Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases, or USAMRIID. The lab does research on deadly biological agents, and grows them to make vaccines. After leaving USAMRIID, he went to work for Science Applications International, and while he was there he commissioned a report about what would happen if anthrax was sent through the mail.

The FBI has also noted that when Dr Hatfill was studying in Zimbabwe he lived in Greendale, which is a suburb of Harare. The return address on the anthrax letters was "Greendale School, New Jersey", which does not exist. The FBI has also suggested that he is loose with the truth. (Dr Hatfill has reportedly told colleagues that he once flew fighter jets for the US military, but his record shows he never progressed above the rank of private).

Dr Hatfill denies he is the anthrax terrorist. He has taken a lie detector test and agreed to let the FBI search his home and car.

In one of his last public comments, which he left on a newspaper editor's answering machine, Dr Hatfill expressed dismay that, after a lifetime "of working until 3am to combat this weapon of mass destruction ... sir, my career is over at this time".

Dr Hatfill's supporters are similarly dismayed, not least because they think the FBI's focus on him distracts them from the theory that the outbreak was linked to the September 11 terrorist attacks. There is some evidence for this, too. In March last year, just six months before those attacks, one of the hijackers, Ahmed al-Haznawi, was treated at a Florida hospital for a severe black lesion on his leg. He told nurses he had bumped into a suitcase, and was treated with antibiotics.

However, the doctor who treated him is now convinced that al-Haznawi had anthrax. In the tense weeks after September 11 the doctor asked an anthrax expert, Dr Tara O'Toole, director of the Centre for Civilian Biodefence at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, to look at al-Haznawi's file. She did, then passed it on to a colleague, who is also a germ expert. Both concluded that the "most probable and coherent" diagnosis was anthrax.

If that could be proven, then the outbreak would almost certainly be linked to events on that day. But it cannot be proven: al-Haznawi died on one of the hijacked aircraft.

For his part, Professor Hugh-Jones does not buy the "international terrorism theory. I think it was domestic."

Dr Hatfill is right in thinking that his career is probably over. He lost his last job, at Science Applications International, after he failed a lie detector test unrelated to this case. Shortly after, the publicity about his possible involvement reached a peak, and he found himself unemployed for almost a year. Then, on July 1, he was finally hired for a new, $US150,000-a-year job as associate director at, of all places, Louisiana State University's National Centre for Biomedical Research and Training. The centre gets $US11 million

($20 million) a year to teach FBI agents and other law enforcement officials to deal with things like, say, an anthrax outbreak.

But how could a "person of interest" in the anthrax case get a job funded by the Justice Department to teach FBI agents about anthrax?

A university spokesman said he could not really explain it, but he denied reports that Dr Hatfill had FBI agents in his class, even though most of those reports quoted the head of the centre saying exactly that.

"Dr Hatfill conducted one really short course before being put on leave with pay, and now we're checking out various things about him and then we'll decide what to do," the spokesman said.

The university had known Dr Hatfill was a person of interest to the case when they employed him, "but that's not unusual. His background is in anthrax, that's his area of expertise, and they are interviewing a number of people in that situation, so that wouldn't unduly concern us."

So why put him on leave? "I can't really say much, except we're reviewing a number of issues."

[The Great Satan]

I wasn't suggesting Condit had any connection with this. I was merely demonstrating how easy it is to dredge up unsavory connections with a web search, by doing same for the ABC reporter shilling the Hatfill novel innuendo, and the FBI agent who went overboard on the photo op search.

Although, if you do want my own tentative inferences from the links I recovered, I suspect Cooper is a careerist slut and Roth a bumbling timeserver.

[Plummz]

What exactly do you fiund unbelievable about a counter rollback? Here is an article that mentions the rollback as well as video surveillance of Zack entering the lab after he had legally lost his clearnce to do so. he weaponization of the Capitol anthrax points to Dietrick, and the "lone, right-wing" govt scientist is most likely a patsy for Zack's clique. Zack, you may remember earlier engaged in a pattern of defamtin and innuendo vs an arab scientist at Dietrick.

[The Great Satan]

What exactly do you fiund unbelievable about a counter rollback?

Uh, the silliness is the idea someone would be using an electron microscope to take a peak at anthrax. Trust me, I'm a biologist. Whoever generated that talking point is clueless about science. It's baloney.

[Plummz]

Fair enough. What would one use to check up on anthrax spores weaponized to a few microns in diameter?

[Plummz]

And what do you think Zack was doing in a lab he had no legal access to?

[The Great Satan]

If you see that somebody is trying to put together a story based on obviously bogus talking points -- as with Hatfill and the "Greendale School," or Zack and the "electron microscope" -- then the issue becomes no longer one of accounting for or disproving the accusers' claims, but one of figuring out what the accusers' motives are. And I think that there is no big mystery about the accusers' agenda in either the Hatfill situation or the Zack situation. Once the dust settles on the Hatfill fiasco, there will be no revivifaction of the "rogue scientist" theory, outside of the usual demented tin-foil communities. This Frankenstein's monster is on the way out, and the true state of affairs, which should have been obvious to anybody with a lick of sense, is going to come out real soon now.

[Plummz]

I know you're set on pinning this on Iraq, but I'd like your answer as someone familiar with the field -- what *would* one use to examine such anthrax?

I have no reason to believe that the reports of Zack engaging in illegal entry are "bogus," nor the reports of his concerted slander of an arabic scientist.

[The Great Satan]

what *would* one use to examine such anthrax?

There would be nothing interesting to learn from visualizing the spores under an electron microscope. The whole thing is pure fantasy.

[Plummz]

Though this is still a less interesting issue to me than the video surveillance, I'm curious as to what instruments one would use after weaponizing anthrax to this degree to make sure the process "took." If not an electron microscope, something a reporter would confuse with an "electron microscope"?

[The Great Satan]

Yes. It's called a "microscope." Which means, this report is noise. Just like "Greendale School" or the "refrigerated" locker in Ocala or the secret CIA safe house with the Cipro parties or the Grand Jury or the bloodhounds that miraculously smelled ten month-old anthrax letters on Hatfill's ex-girlfriend. It's BS.

[Plummz]

It's called a "microscope."

So, not at all outside the bounds of what a typical reporter would call an "electron microscope," if it had a memory system or any other kind of electronic component.

[The Great Satan]

Have you ever seen an electron microscope? The reporter doesn't know what he's talking back. This is some third hand bullshit that doesn't mean anything. Uh, like "Greendale School," "refrigerated storage locker," or "CIA safe house."

[Plummz]

It could mean something despite it being third-hand, like the game of telephopne. Zack's unauthorized entry certainly means something.

[dead]

Wait and see. The blackmailer (Iraq) will be exposed, most likely within the next four weeks. And, by all means, bookmark this post and check back with me on 9/11/2002 to see how the picture is shaping up.

The month is almost up. Any revisions on your predictions?

[Ispy4u]

I have never read any theories about the possibility of the person handling the stuff may have known it was deadly and was willing to sacrifice themselves. Kinda like Atta and the clowns he hung out with.

[Wolfstar]

"...one of the hijackers...was treated...for a severe black lesion...the doctor...is now convinced that al-Haznawi had anthrax...[he] asked an anthrax expert, Dr Tara O'Toole, director of the Centre for Civilian Biodefence at Johns Hopkins University ...to look at al-Haznawi's file. She did, then passed it on to a colleague...also a germ expert. Both concluded that the 'most probable and coherent' diagnosis was anthrax. If that could be proven, then the outbreak would almost certainly be linked to events on that day."

I don't know why the opinions of the doctor and the experts who reviewed the file are not considered evidence and given the weight they deserve. If al-Haznawi had lived, been arrested, and went to court, the prosecution most definitely could use their testimony in building the circumstantial evidence portion of the case. The overwhelming majority of criminal convictions are obtained largely with circumstantial evidence.

Atta and at least two other hijackers had the:

• Opportunity — they lived in Florida not far from the American Media building and rented an apartment through the real-estate-agent wife of an AM executive.
• Demonstrated interest in potential bio-weapons delivery systems — looked into use of crop dusters.
• Motive — if the kind of hatred demonstrated by the hijackings doesn't prove motive, nothing will.
• Peculiar physical problems — (a) Atta and one other hijacker in the pharmacy looking for something for what the pharmacist thought looked burned hands. (b) al-Haznawi's leision.
• A probable link to Iraq (and its weaponized anthrax) — the Prague meeting between Atta and the Iraqi intelligence officer.

While none of the above absolutely nails the case, it sure presents a boat-load of curious circumstances. They're certainly a heck of a lot more concrete that the very slim stuff that's been made public about Hatfill.

[Wolfstar]

Excellent, Satan. I'm especially gratified to see that there is at least one person other than myself who remembers that employees at American Media said the package with the white powder in it arrived approximately Sept. 8th of last year. They had reason to recall it, because because the letter was some sort of rant against a celebrity, and it contained an inexpensive Star of David along with the powdery substance.

The AM letter was discarded and never recovered. There was at least one other letter that was never recovered: the one that went to CBS news. Dan Rather's assistant discarded it.

If Atta and his gang were involved with the anthrax attack — and the circumstantial evidence is pretty strong that they were — they obviously had one or more accomplices who did not die on those planes. They may have mailed the first one (this is the significance of the pre-9/11 arrival of the AM letter), but the others were definitely mailed after the hijackings.

I also think it is worth pondering why the anthrax attack stopped. One logical reason could be that the Atta gang was dead and their accomplice(s) were caught up in the DOJ's sweep of Muslim men last winter.

[cookcounty]

"Demonstrated interest in potential bio-weapons delivery systems — looked into use of crop dusters."

I don't think this has been emphasized enough. There were repeated move's in this direction by a number of the hi-jackers (including Moussaoui). It's hard to imagine them doing this if they were not convinced that bio/chem weapons were available to them.

Another issue that came up early, but seems now forgotten is that the British lab that has anthrax (I'm trying to remember the name--"Porton Down" or something similar) was reportedly owned by an Arab. (please excuse my profiling).

[The Great Satan]

The month is almost up. Any revisions on your predictions?

I didn't expect Hatfill to be fired at the end of his one month's paid leave -- I thought that would be disposed of by now -- so that didn't go as I expected. OTOH, he hasn't been arrested, his accusers have largely fallen silent, and the FBI and DOJ have been lambasted by almost every important newspaper in the country for persecuting this man.

The other unexpected development in the last month has been the FBI's surprise return to AMI, supposedly to look for the letter which killed Bob Stevens. That search is almost done: the search warrant expires tomorrow, 9/11/02. But, it is not clear yet whether that is going to be the pretext for an "uncloaking" timed to coincide with the Iraq buildup, or whether it simply represents a last desperate attempt by a stalled FBI investigation to come up with something before the anniversary of 9-11.

Here's Cheney from MTP, last Sunday:

VICE PRES. CHENEY: It’s also important not to focus just on the nuclear threat. I mean, that sort of grabs everybody’s attention, and that’s what we’re used to dealing with. But come back to 9/11 again, and one of the real concerns about Saddam Hussein, as well, is his biological weapons capability; the fact that he may, at some point, try to use smallpox, anthrax, plague, some other kind of biological agent against other nations, possibly including even the United States. So this is not just a one-dimensional threat. This just isn’t a guy who’s now back trying once again to build nuclear weapons. It’s the fact that we’ve also seen him in these other areas, in chemicals, but also especially in biological weapons, increase his capacity to produce and deliver these weapons upon his enemies.

MR. RUSSERT: But if he ever did that, would we not wipe him off the face of the Earth?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Who did the anthrax attack last fall, Tim? We don’t know.

MR. RUSSERT: Could it have been Saddam?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don’t know. I don’t know who did it. I’m not here today to speculate on or to suggest that he did. My point is that it’s the nature of terrorist attacks of these unconventional warfare methods, that it’s very hard sometimes to identify who’s responsible. Who’s the source? We were able to come fairly quickly to the conclusion after 9/11 that Osama bin Laden was, in fact, the individual behind the 9/11 attacks. But, like I say, I point out the anthrax example just to remind everybody that it is very hard sometimes, especially when we’re dealing with something like a biological weapon that could conceivably be misconstrued, at least for some period, as a naturally occurring event, that we may not know who launches the next attack. And that’s what makes it doubly difficult. And that’s why it’s so important for us when we do identify the kind of threat that we see emerging now in Iraq, when we do see the capabilities of that regime and the way Saddam Hussein has operated over the years that we have to give serious consideration to how we’re going to address it before he can launch an attack, not wait until after he’s launched an attack.

So, Cheney "doesn't know" if Saddam was behind the anthrax, i.e. if Saddam has sleeper cells in the US equipped with highly weaponized anthrax. That would seem like a rather important thing to know before we go to war with him, wouldn't it? That is rather hard to square with the shambolic public face of Amerithrax. What's going on?

My old view was that Saddam had Bush cornered, that there would be no attack on Iraq until we could protect against the threat presented in those letters, so Bush would continue to stall indefinitely, perhaps for years, then take Saddam on militarily or just let the matter drop. More recently, I've seen signs that he plans to gamble by taking Saddam on, by pointing the finger at him and taking a quasi-legal approach, calling for the Iraqis to cough him up, and applying every kind of pressure short of a frontal attack to get him out. I'm still inclined to think Bush is going to try to get him out sooner rather than later, but it's going to be a bit more drawn out than I thought a month ago. I don't think Bush is in any hurry, nor should he be. Up to a point, drawing this out eases the psychological adjustment of the American people to the realization that Saddam has us in a tight spot, while simultaneously increasing the psychological stress on Saddam and the Iraqi people, and buying time for us to build our defenses. But, the bottom line is, we still don't know what Bush plans to do about Iraq -- he's still holding his cards close to the chest. The chips have yet to fall.

[dead]

I agree that Cheney wouldn't have made that vague suggestion without having some knowledge.

I still don't believe the anthrax attack was coordinated and executed by Iraq. Frankly, it wasn't very effective. Surely they were hoping to kill more than 5 people.

I believe Iraq supplied the anthrax to Al Qaeda, and those half-morons did the best they could with it. In addition, they had no concerns about safe-handling.

I'm pretty sure the administration is sitting on plenty of incriminating information on Iraq. But I believe most of it is tangential (supporting terrorists) rather than direct (planning and execution of the attacks). Doesn't really matter though, either way they're guilty.

The release of the information will most likely come a week or two before we begin the attack. We'll present it to congress (who will come on board), the UN (who will not, but we don't care) and the media (who will hem and haw and see what the polls say.)

Either way, we're going to retaliate against Iraq. And it will be thorough.

One question I have still though is this - Are the intelligence agencies still confused about Hatfill? Or are they knowingly screwing up his life? Or (most likely to me) is Hatfill willingly allowing himself to be used by the intelligence agencies as a decoy, pretending to be "hurt" by the experience, while actually being an agent. There is evidence in his personal history that would suggest he is a likely candidate to be working covertly for one intelligence agency or another.