“It Was Ivins, With a Flask, 200 Miles from the Site of the Crime”
I just finished watching the DOJ/FBI press conference on the anthrax investigation, and our crack DOJ wants us to believe that, by providing a lot of circumstantial evidence that places Bruce Ivins in the same room as a flask full of anthrax used in the attack, they’ve proven not only that Ivins was involved in the crime, but that he was the only one involved in the crime.
In other words, they haven’t solved this crime, but they want us to all go away and pretend they have.
Specifically, the only evidence that Ivins actually drove to Princeton to mail the anthrax is that he could have. And that he had a latent obsession for sorority girls from sorority that had an office–but not girls–in the vicinity of the mailbox in question. And that he had a porn-related post office box in an area where it was possible to buy the envelopes used in the crime (though you could probably say that about 300,000 other people had ready access to post offices that also had the same envelopes available). Oh, and by the way, there’s no reason to tie Ivins with the handwriting that appeared on those envelopes that so many other people could have gotten, either.
While what I’ve seen of their case so far makes a pretty compelling argument that Ivins was involved in creating the anthrax, they’ve got nothing that explains how it walked out of Ft. Detrick, got into envelopes, and got sent to a bunch of media figures and senators. Importantly, their "motive" for the selection of Leahy and Daschle is piss poor.
And, as I’ve said twice already, if they take their "motive" seriously: a desire to make sure anthrax vaccines were continued, a desire to pass the PATRIOT Act, and a reason to dislike Daschle and Leahy, Scooter Libby (who also lived in an area where he could have gotten those envelopes) and Dick Cheney had much stronger motives for sending the anthrax.
But don’t worry, the FBI says. We’ve got Ivins 200 miles away and no real motive and no real evidence tying him to the emptying the flask, but since we used some really cool science to place Ivins with the flask, that should be good enough for you.
Per http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08…..tml?ref=us
How about what that other guy said:
I like that guy’s attitude. But the guy who attended the briefing said that “they,” presumably the FBI, “sat on THESE PEOPLE long enough that they broke them,” which raises the question of whom besides Ivins they sat on and broke.
Thanks for shedding light on the Whitewash and coverup. This has been bungled clearly.
One wonders what were the results of the swabs (e.g. bacterial samples) taken from his residence, vehicles, and other places named in warrants? Did anthrax show up? Was it genetically and phenotypically identical to RMR-1029? Were any specimens of Baccilis subtilis found in the swabs? Were they genetically or phenotypically identical to the B. subtilis contaminants in some of the anthrax letters?
Inquiring minds….
A reporter asked about that–I think he said there was nothing found. He asked if maybe Ivins had cleaned his car. So no evidence there.
In warrant return 7-524_M-01 and number of swabs and vac. filters are identified as procuced from the search of his residence. What was found on those?
And returned signed
? Is that accepted in chain of custody?
Later search warrants for the vehicles produced no seizures.
What was the turning point and the information that caused them to shift gears? It seems to me they would have had the details of their most compelling case against Ivins fairly early on. At least during the same time as they were focusing on Hatfill. They would have known about his work schedule, where the powder came from, perhaps his box office, his flimsy reason for working late on the nights that he did. Why then, did they focus so strongly on Hatfill? Why not Ivins until now?
They didn’t have the genetic match until 2006 or 7.
I’ll write it again. Judy Miller could be placed with a motive and a higher likelihood, to deposit mail at a Princeton mailbox more so than Ivins.( The release date of her book, GERMS…, just seems creepy in relation to the timing of her “fake” anthrax threat.
I agree with you, Libby and Cheney had much stronger motives. Unfortunately, if looking at Libby and Judy, “their roots” give them motive as well.
One thing I cannot shake is the Israeli spy story having roots in NJ and FL…I mean with all the Israeli spy stories and indictments of recent I guess anything is possible.
Leahy is happy with this?
Why would you want to “shake” the Israeli Spy Story?
It is THE story.
The glue that runs throughout.
http://plungerspeaks.blogspot.com
Hello K,
You can change your name, but not your obsession.
I just put up an analysis of the “genetics” arguments in the first search warrant at my blog. Suffice it to say that from a technical standpoint, that document raises many more questions than it answers. The key flask, RMR-1029 was referred to interchangeably by Ivins as “Dugway Ames Spores – 1997″. Not addressed in the search warrant with respect to the material in that flask is who grew the culture, how large the culture was, who processed it, if the spores were treated to make them more deadly and where it was produced. Especially important is, if it was produced at Dugway, does the material in RMR-1029 represent all of the material produced in that batch?
And what of the missing pathogens identified by the army in Ft. Detrick lab sloppyness review in the 1990s (http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/01/26/assaad/)?
Has anyone accounted for the strains (genetics) of these missing cultures or specimens? Could they be RMR-1029, that walked away from the lab in the ’90s carried by persons unknown?
Also, they say that they collected over one thousand anthrax samples and only 8 had the four specific genetic mutations related to RMR-1029. I want to know where those 8 samples came from. Were they all from Ft. Detrick?
Yeah, they don’t tell us anything about those samples other than that they have RMR-1029 as the starter material. Very good question.
They narrow down to Ft. Detrick based on a conclusion they make about envelopes. Among laboratories only Ft. Detrick was served by places that sold those envelopes.
Sorry, misunderstood your point.
Yes but …”As a result of this collection, envelopes with printing defects identical to printing defects identified on the envelopes utilized in the anthrax attacks during the fall of 2001 were collected from the Fairfax Main post office in Fairfax, Virginia and the Cumberland and Elkton post offices in Maryland….”
Draw a 7-10 mile circle around Fairfax Main, and you take in probably 1/3 of the DC Metro area including Pentagon, CIA and downtown.
Isn’t one of their arguments that the Detrick sample was the only one in the same area as those envelopes were available?
I thought it was that Deterick was the only one of the labs on their list that was in the same area where those envelopes were available — not the same thing at all. Other labs, perhaps still secret, or other individuals might have been located in some other area where the envelopes were available. And besides, the perp(s) could have travelled from anywhere in the world to Frederick to buy the envelopes there, just to incriminate the Detrick facility.
Yeah, like somebody who could pull this off would be unable to get on an airplane and fly to the East Coast.
Interesting work. I would like to know where the 8 samples tied to RMR-1029 in the FBI’s repository came from. If these were not directly from the original flask or found in the attacks, then that would suggest there were other possible sources for the anthrax used in the attacks.
I also do not understand the following:
RMR-1029 was stored in the B3 biocontainment suite within Building 1425 of the United States Army Medical Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), Fort Detrick, Maryland. Access to the suite is afforded only to those personnel who are approved by the USAMRIID Security, Safety, and Special Immunizations Program to have the required background check, training, and medical protection (vaccination or personal protective equipment (PPE)). Dr. Bruce Ivins has unrestricted access to the suite and has been the sole custodian of RMR-1029 since it was first grown in 1997.
OTOH they are saying Ivins was the sole custodian of RMR-1029 but on the other they are saying an indeterminate number of other personnel also had access to the suite and conceivably RMR-1029. We are talking people who would know how to grow and culture anthrax so the amount removed from the RMR-1029 flask for such purposes could have been vanishingly small. Indeed if RMR-1029 was used in experiments, someone could have acquired a sample of it at some point in those.
In any case, my reading of this is that this only proves what we already knew that there was a Fort Detrick connection to the anthrax used in the attacks. It is not, however, a smoking gun and does not point to any specific individual. Yes, Ivins was the custodian of the flask but others had access to it or its contents at various times. What does this prove? Nothing.
I should also point out that Ivins did not leave a suicide note. It is my understanding most suicides do. Yet this has not been remarked on. There have been reports that Ivins had been drinking a lot since the FBI began its pursuit of him, that he had been mixing drugs with his alcohol, and that he had been found unconscious from this on more than one occasion. So I wonder if, in fact, he intentionally tried to commit suicide or if he accidentally OD’ed on a lethal combination. While it has been said he took Tylenol 3’s, I have not heard any mention of a blood alcohol level.
No mention of a blood alcohol level because we don’t have any verification that an autopsy was done, much less the results if there was. Surely, surely, surely this is a situation where an autopsy would be mandatory.
Nell,
In a thread a while back, I referenced someone who said that an autopsy WAS done.
No, it was only a blood test.
Any details available in a link somewhere on that blood test? I assume that means no tissue or other samples taken. Blood/tox panel including details of what tested for (it can really vary & yes, I know, probably no info available on this).
Despite the vaccinations, a full autopsy should have been performed to rule out pathogen related death from lab leakage or contamination (slow or otherwise) in a death from other than natural causes.
DOJ & FBI in a dead heat as to which looked more “D” ring in today’s presser.
I saw that, but no one has verified it, and who will have access to the results?
i remember reading somewhere that an autopsy wasn’t done and that bothered me deeply.
I guess I thought they had the genetic match earlier than that or at least some evidence that it came from that lab?
Playing devil’s advocate, it is curious the after hours use of the lab started to spike in August 2001, not after 9/11.
I’d think it would take some time to make two grams of anthrax spores as pure as the Daschle and Leahy letters contained.
Make that four grams (two in each letter).
It only looks like a spike in the cropped window FBI provides. Maybe he did that every month. What was he working on? We don’t know.
Ivins’ oldest brother said this:
It was his own fault, I thought,” said Tom Ivins. “What he did, he screwed himself up. He got involved with the wrong people.”
I haven’t seen anyone anywhere address this comment.
Do you have a link for that?
Several nights ago I heard an interview with Tom Ivins. (I believe it was on BBC World Service during the wee hours, but it could have been on NPR.) In any case I was deeply struck by the utter lack of empathy and the total dislike he expressed for his brother. A big contrast with Ted Kazinski’s (the Unibomber) brother.
Please do not get the impression that I am sympathetic toward Tom Ivins. It sounds like Bruce Ivins came from a troubled family.
But considering the antipathy displayed by the older brother, why would he say something like that?
Yeah. He worked alone.
Why should anyone address the comments of a brother who hadn’t talked with Ivins for more than a decade?
You won’t get any argument from me that Tom Ivins seems to be a hateful, old man. And I recognize that he could very well have been shooting from the hip.
But saying that his brother got involved with the wrong people seems to be an effort to reduce his brother’s guilt. Why bother saying it? And you are right, how would he know this if he hadn’t talked to his brother in so many years? Unless, of course, he based it on his conversation with the FBI.
Rude, ignorant people can still sometimes be useful sources of information.
Anyway, the subject has become a distraction, so it’s probably best dropped.
JimWhite forgot to link to his post, so I’ll do it for him.
Assuming that Fort Detrick has extensive security measures in place, who at that facility has the ability to monitor employees’ e-mail?
It will be interesting to see what Leahy’s reaction is to all of this.
~~~
I lived in Bethesda for 6 years, and I have good friends that are Frederick natives. All this I-270 talk is taking me back to my Maryland days…
Here is the link:
http://www.kypost.com/content/…..cf8b55e154
Here’s an interesting tidbit from the last search warrant:
I think it would be very helpful and informative if they released those letters to Congress and the press.
Also, I didn’t watch the press conference. Is anyone yet suggesting there is a handwriting match for Ivins with the attack letters?
“Laser like precision” USA Jeff Taylor who lost his laser when it came to prosecuting Miers and Bolten and Rove for contempt of Congress claimed that he “distorted” his hand writing at the press conference. But how does he know Ivins did the distorting or wasn’t a cutout or framed?
What is the FBI doing? Really?
Granted that a grand jury was on the verge of handing down an indictment, and that the prime suspect, learning that he would be indicted, took his own life–what then?
Is the FBI asking us to believe that his guilt has already been established beyond a reasonable doubt? But this is absurd! No case can be made, no crime can be resolved. Or are they simply trying to convince us that they worked on the case, and made some degree of progress? No doubt they have…. but so what?
Perhaps they’ve despaired of ever solving the case, and feel a need to convince us that they’ve done the best possible job (a point that can never be proven).
Why won’t they just let it go–admitting, as they do so, that mistakes were made along the way? Many a crime goes unsolved, after all.
Perhaps they’re spooked by a general collapse of credibility in other areas of “anti-terrorist” activity–Guantanamo Bay being an instance in which the FBI was marginally involved. By the President’s outing of Plame, perhaps. By his wrecking of the DoJ.
Can anyone speak to the morale of the bureaucrats involved in this side of things?
If they’re trying to soothe my paranoia, they haven’t accomplished very much.
11 – I think the brother sounds kind of nuts himself – wasn’t there some reference to Bruce not being a “man, like me” or something like that?
I have to admit that a review of some of what they have in the first set of docs linked really does make me wonder why Hatfill lit their pinballs up more so than Ivins originally.
Some of what is in there about Ivins and his possible paranoid personality disorder does make you wonder both i) if some of the stories of harassment were made up – along the lines of the sorority targeting him as an enemy, or ii) if not made up, and if the FBI knew about this possible paranoid disorder, why they wouldn’t have pretty much known that they would drive him to something drastic and likely a suicide attempt.
I’ve read they were estranged.
The brother comes off as very wacko, hateful and illiterate. And he openly said he hadn’t been close to his brother in 20 years or something. The stuff from the brother is totally worthless.
NB: There are two brothers, as I recall, and the other one sounds more empathetic.
Emptywheel, Maybe you’ve found this by now … the hairs are mentioned at the top of page seven in this document:
http://www.usdoj.gov/amerithra…..idavit.pdf
Mary @23:
I had that same question last thread and was answered with the block quote below by commenter “plunger”. That they went after Hatfill with his profile suggests to me that they were investigating in good faith and not trying to suppress evidence of a many-fingered conspiracy — especially, as emptywheel explained, when you take into account how Miller and Libby/Cheney sought to utilize the kind of work Hatfill did with MWL’s and that Hatfill therefore would have sort of pointed right back at them.
I’ll warrant you probably know a lot more about the Hatfill investigation already, though.
SAIC was the contractor that botched the FBI system known as “Trilogy”.
OT, Bmaz… Rusty defends the pastor’s wife.
How do these cases even get to trial?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..17311.html
I have zero aptitude for anything scientific, so maybe someone can explain this to me:
If Ivins gave the feds samples that didn’t match the anthrax in the letters — but when the flasks were examined later they did match — couldn’t it be that someone added the missing ingredients during the time that passed between when Ivins first handed over the samples and when they later re-checked the flasks? In other words, the tell-tale DNA that seals the deal (for some) was added after the initial sampling. Where that DNA would come from, of course, is from the comparison anthrax samples in the FBI lab. Yes? No?
I keep seeing the word “identical” when the DNA is mentioned, but a day or so ago the word “similar” was used. Which is it?
Also, I have read that 10 people had access to the anthrax in question, but today they said it was in Ivins’ sole custody or words to that effect. Which is it?
FBI release the results of the swab analysis from Ivin’s house, vehicles, and other places not Ft. Detrick. Any anthrax found?
Certainly something other than this circumstantial crap….
Show evidence that others (10 or more) with access to that lab can be eliminated from suspicion, and why.
One of the email addresses that appeared in the search warrants is [email protected] … Here’s a post I found in a Google groups search:
jimmyflathead
View profile
More options Dec 21 2005, 12:00 am
Newsgroups: alt.literature
From: jimmyflath…@yahoo.com (jimmyflathead)
Date: 21 Dec 2005 04:00:09 GMT
Local: Wed, Dec 21 2005 12:00 am
Subject: KKG sorority – clearing up a misconception
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
It’s a common misconception that “Kappa Kappa Gamma” stands for “Key
to the Kingdom of God.” Actually, it stands for “Kalon K’Agathon
Gnothi,” which is Greek for “Know the Beautiful and the Good.” KKG is
big on the virtues of Plato: “THe Good, The True, and The Beautiful.”
The organization is one of the oldest women’s fraternities in the
country, founded in 1870 at Monmouth College. Famous alumnae include
Ashley Judd, Jane Pauley and Kate Jackson.
– Jimmy Flathead
_______________
Could “Flathead” be the Flathead in Montana, and if so, does that have any significance?
Per Glenzilla:
Glenn goes on to show why that is not only not incriminating, but not even a coincidence given the headlines of the day.
But this business of guilt by linguistic association reminded me of the elaborate analysis done by a Vassar English professor, implicating the now exonerated Dr. Hatfill: http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/Bio…..thrax.html
Foster also got involved in the JonBenet Ramsey case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Foster_(professor)
A few items I thought were interesting from the first docs:
* He and his lab appear to have been currently working on “liquid anthrax spore preparations for animal aerosol challenges” which might help explain why, although he was very familiar with use of a lyophilizer he had to borrow one and why his lab crew would have said they didn’t use them for what they were working on.
* He began seeing a psychiatrist in Feb of 2000 and was placed on Celexa and in emails in 2000 indicated that the psychiatrist thought he had paranoid personality disorder, and that he was scared himself by his paranoia attacks, e.g., “What is REALLY scary is the paranoia”
* He also was seeing another woman presumably for counseling then and they had some kind of confrontation and he quit seeing her. He later says in an email that she wanted to have him jailed. “The psychiatrist is helpful only because he prescribes the Celexa. He’s not that easy to talk to, and he doesn’t really pick up on my problems. The woman I saw before I went into group wanted to get me put in jail.”
* There appears to have been some significant incident in spring of 2000 or 2001 (I’d guess 2001, but the language isn’t 100% clear) involving Ivins. From September 7,2001 email, “I was taken off the Special Immunization Program because of what happened last spring, and I’ve just gotten back on it, getting my anthrax and Yellow fever shots.” (emph added) So in Sept 2001, Ivins would have been just getting revaccinated.
* Ivins had apparently been included specifically in criticisms involving the adjuvant selection and use for anthrax vaccines that were alleged to be tied to Gulf War Syndrome and at the end of August, 2001, an email indicated that Ivins was pretty po’d at NBC and the reporter.
* An Ivins email on the sorority indicates that he had paranoid thoughts of them declaring him an enemy and “going after” him in the 60s and 70s.
* Taking their bare allegations at face value (which is difficult bc apparently Ivins disputed some of them and we don’t know what support there is on either side) Ivins early on submitted two samples, neither of which were the actual RMR-1029 to which Ivins and his labbies had access which was the actual original strain. Ivins was, on April 7, 2004, again asked to submit a sample but this time with an FBI special agent accompanying him into the containment room, B-3, and witnessing the sampling and slide prep. Later that day, the flask was confiscated and room sealed. However, not until June 17, 2004 was a report done showing that the RMR-1029 was the originating source. [2 things, what provoked the later in the day seizure after the slides were prepped in April, and would it ordinarily, in such an imporant matter, have taken over 2 mos for that testing to be complete?] In any event, after the report tells them Ivins flask is the originating source – despite his prior two samples that did not match – no one goes to confront him about that until —- MARCH 2005. ??
* When Ivins is confronted in March 2005, he first says that he has known for about a year that his RMR-1029 samples matched the anthrax used, because FBI Agent Steele told him so. Steele denies this. Then Ivins seems to be left alone for two years until he is interviewed again in May 2007 about the samples, and then he says that he knew within 3 mos of the attacks that his RMR-1029 had “unique morphological similarities” to the attack anthrax bc three co-workers told him so, but the co-workers deny telling him that info (again – all this is FBI best face – who knows what would come out with discovery and cross etc.)
* Per the FBI, despite working with lots of law enforcment on the attacks, Ivins never indicated to them that he know his RMR-1029 had “phenotypic similarities ” to the attack anthrax. They pretty much make it sound like he was a source of the focus on Hatfill, when they vaguely say that not only did he not mention his RMR-1029 similarities to the attack anthrax, but he also affirmatively told them that the attack anthrax “resembled that of another researcher” and that the attack anthrax was “dissimilar” to the strains used in Ivins lab.
* Apparently it was not until July of 2007 that anyone bothered to look at Ivins history of medical issues and the fact that he had been “prescribed various psychotropic medications including antidepressants, ntipsychotics, and anti-anxiety, for his mental health issues from 2000 through 2006.”
* The RMR-1029 was kept in the containment room called B-3 which had access controlled and recorded. While Ivins worked late nights from time to time, not only did his late night work spike in August, Sept and Oct of 2001 compared to the previous year and to prior and subsequent months, but his late night access to room B-3 in particular “spiked” and he spent much more time in B-3 at nights and on weekends when no other researchers were present in the containment room than any of the others with access. There was no reason that co-workers or Ivins could give as to why he would need so much access to B-3, the containment room, during this period either based on his experiments or work load.
All of that is just their bare assertions, but to the extent any or much of it is true, it is really troubling that they left all that lying fallow to so over-focus on Hatfill, although it sounds as if there may have been help in turning their focus to Hatfill.
It also seems to make clear that, by at least July of last year, they knew that Ivins had significant mental health issues and they almost had to ahve known that, as a paranoid, he would respond in very “incriminating” ways, guilty or not, if they put pressure on.
I’m not sure what kind of computer access or internet there was in the containment room, B-3, as to whether some ez, if embarassing, answers might lie there.
And the fact that his coworkers are so supportive is pretty strong circumstantial evidence in his favor (I don’t recall there being much of an outpouring over Hatfill, was there??)
I do know that this all brings me back to wondering what kind of screening and supervision (researchers said that prior to the attacks they could take out anything they want, no checking??) is going on at these types of facilities.
This is where you get into questions about the Hatfill suit, I think, and some of the things they were doing in that.
“All of that is just their bare assertions, but to the extent any or much of it is true, it is really troubling that they left all that lying fallow to so over-focus on Hatfill, although it sounds as if there may have been help in turning their focus to Hatfill.”
This makes most sense to me if the purpose of the whole investigation was to find a scapegoat, nail him, and close the case to “resolve” the issue while concealing the co-conspirators. All they needed was one “guilty” person.
Oh, am I wearing my tinfoil hat again?
Bob in HI
Here are two of your [Mary’s] bullet points, which deal with Ivins’s activities around 9/11/01:
Note that both involve activities of interest just prior to 9/11/01. Break out the tinfoil.
Over what period of time was he being medicated, and how do any of us know what they ACTUALLY put in his prescriptions?
We are dealing with the most skilled, cunning and ruthless organization in the world.
If they wanted to make him crazy using medication, they did.
Wait a minute. Was there any real investigation into HOW he prepared the anthrax? The early reports (which may well have been pure bullshit, I know) described this particular batch of spores as highly weaponized and unlike anything that had ever been seen. We were told that, as far as we know, even the Russians hadn’t been able to come up with something like this. Now we’re being told that some lone lunatic did it by working late for a month?
Not buying it. Here’s the scenario that fits what we’re hearing, from all the “they”s, to the man’s family being shown photos of the dead, to his belief that he was being scapegoated, to his list of co-workers (his team), to his brother’s comment that he fell in with the wrong people: Ivins was part of a team whose job was to design weaponized anthrax. That’s illegal, which in the current Administration means that it’s “classified”, so even now, those involved can’t talk about it without going to jail. It’s why they paid millions of dollars to Hatfield–to shut him up after their second scapegoating effort failed. It’s why so many people had access to weaponized anthrax. It’s why Ivins felt guilty enough to kill himself. It fits.
Exactly. They can’t tell me in the amount of time he had in those “spiked hours” working late that he single-handedly designed, developed, created and implemented a method to coat spores in poly glass (as mentioned by some research and repeated in one of these threads) for weaponization, without detection until a handful of years later.
Further, this guy sounds like an escapee from one of Ewen Cameron’s projects. So does his extremely detached older brother.
I can’t tell what they’re trying to hide here: the government’s culpability in this crime, or the fact that there remains a domestic terrorist on the loose they’ve never been able to bring to justice.
Imagine what we might think as a country if we were to snap out of our somnolence and realize that we were attacked from within — and these jackasses in office were either part of the attack, or can’t find their asses with both hands let alone keep us safe from the next attack.
The spores were not coated. That’s a misconception that started early and apparently won’t die.
40 My understanding on the B-3 suite is that Ivins and 9 other coworkers – his lab people – had that access. Calling him “sole custodian” within the same breath of saying several people had access is pretty bizarre.
I think the fact that he was a very unhappy, possible paranoid, makes the lack of a suicide note even odder, and the choice of Tylenol is very weird. Given that he was supposedly going into long and late night rants about his treatment, it’s really hard to believe that the didn’t have any words of recrimination and/or conspiracy he wanted to leave.
44 – I thought that one brother was saying nothing- has he opened up? Missed that.
I really think there’s just not enough info to make any firm decisions and a lot of it goes down different alleys, but from what has been released, it’s pretty clear that no one in their right mind would call this case “closed” without more.
The case is not ‘Closed’ if one has a reasonable and rational mind, but Mary, I would suggest that ‘right’-minded people are ‘close’-minded people, more often than not.
In fact most of our problems come directly from the ‘right’ minded,
Sorry, Mary, but I couldn’t resist.
Just as ‘liberal’ has been made accursed, perhaps the word, ‘right’ is, now, especially suspect.
;~D
Sorry — I’m reading and writing on the fly, and I’m remembering from a couple of days ago, so I can’t recall exactly how much the second brother said. I just remember that he was clearly mourning. He sounded just the way you would expect a family member to sound.
It was partly that that made the oldest brother’s comments stand out.
Mind you, I think that other people’s families are always going to be puzzles to most of us. Many people react to death, or even just trouble, in ways that appear very cold on the surface. And we never really know what that means unless we get to know the individuals themselves very well.
Brother Tom was cold all the way through, and was completely out of touch with Bruce Ivins, so as far as I’m concerned the less said about him the better.
Any family member who’d talk extensively to the press at this point wouldn’t be acting wisely. The people who need to answer questions are those running the investigation/prosecution, not the family.
That is very wise advice. Unfortunately, most people are not media-savvy, especially when they’ve just been ambushed by something in their personal lives, so they say and do things that probably aren’t wise.
I’m not disagreeing with you, just reporting observations of too many sad situations over time.
From NYT article:
“About 45 million of the pre-stamped envelopes were made by a Pennsylvania company between late 2000 and early 2002, and some bore tiny but tell-tale printing defects. Investigators traced those to the Dulles Stamp Distribution Office in Virginia , which serves post offices in Maryland or Virginia, the official documents relate.”
I thought it was Maryland AND Virginia, not Maryland OR Virginia. So now is the story that they don’t even know for sure the envelopes were sold at the post office he used in his hometown?
Mary: I like your point about the suicide note. It does seem that someone in his supposed state of mind would have had plenty to say — especially given his supposed habit of sending long, rambling late night emails.
I am surprised at the amount of ammunition they took out of his house.
He couldn’t do better than Tylenol 3?
Same thought. He had hollow points, shot gun shells, yada yada.
And still, no autopsy?
48 – but isn’t right, left? Aren’t the lefties “right minded” and the righties, “left minded”
I’m too confused now. I come from a family were there are not enough corners on normal tables to accomodate all the left-handed, right minded folk.
50 – actually Hugh was the one who mentioned it first, I was just agreeing with him (and you now too) that it seems a point that merits a mention.
Mary;
LOL!
I bow to your superior wit and hemispherical wisdom.
;~D
Rayne,
If – and that’s a big if – I understand it correctly, he washed and washed and washed the spores in northeast water until they were so pure, so free of impurities, that they literally floated into the air when freed from the envelope.
Was he washing spores for a few nights?
Washing.
Washing.
Washing.
Drying.
Coating. In a nano-thick coat evenly applied, at least as I understood the comment left in another thread (which I can’t find, dammit).
In copious volumes (copious, in terms of this application, might be a handful or two).
Try it with fern or mushroom spores for practice, see if you can do it at home in a few handfuls of hours by yourself.
Ri-i-ight.
I’d feel a lot better if scientists weren’t as suspicious as I am.
There was no coating.
Wash your mind of the idea of a coating.
Right on, EW!
I’ve spent my day resuscitating my DFH ‘88 Toyota Van in order to get it to the local red-neck auto repairman so that he can hopefully breath new life into it. Or at least get it running well enough to be smogged. Thus have missed out on much that is going on here today. Trying to catch up.
Thank you everyone!!
If they had a case, why did FBI need the incredible Duley?
“He was troubled” is not a motive. I’m troubled, too, watching this lynching.
Did anyone ask the FBI about the previously reported polyglass coating for the spores and how Ivins could have pulled that off?
There was no polyglass coating. No scientist who ever examined the spores reported a coating, polyglass or otherwise.
You are quite emphatic about this, and equally so @71 and @74, but you don’t provide any links or sources. How can you be so sure? And why should we take your word for it?
I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I always get suspicious when someone gets extra double emphatic without providing any evidence.
Bob in HI
Read this:
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/coatings.html
OK, thanks for the link.
Bob in HI
A couple points to make:
Given the government’s Ivins document dump (and only of those things which were derogatory and/or implied something negative about Ivins), wouldn’t it be most interesting if the government had also produced, side by side, their documentation on Hatfill?
I would imagine that the government has as much derogatory information on Dr. Hatfill because, after all, he was their primary suspect for over 5 fookin’ years!
And I imagine that if one were to view both the government information on Hatfill alongside Ivins, one might be inclined to see a whole lot of suspicious stuff.
I wonder what a jury would think if they were presented with all the derogatory information against both Ivins and Hatfill. Would they be able to pick one over the other? Would they then be able to convict either?
Something tells me that they’d have one hell of a time concluding “beyond a reasonable doubt” that either Ivins or Hatfill was responsible.
Another point:
If we were able to see the files on both Ivins and Hatfill side by side, would we be able to pick out the “turning point” and time when the government decided that Hatfill wasn’t the perp, and that Ivins was?
Do you think it might be of value to the public that the government explains just what that “turning point” was? Was there even a “turning point”?
Lastly, I wonder how many other “suspects” the government focused on. Do you think that there may be a ton of circumstantial evidence against a whole raft of folks, but the government decided/pinned a tail on the donkey/picked the short straw and Ivins won?
Just a few thoughts. Nothing to see here folks. Move along. Your government knows best.
43
…because of what happened last spring…
IIRC, Ivins had some kind of health problem around that time that he attributed to the vaccine. He could be referring to that.
One of the articles I linked to last night — can’t recall which one — said that the security cams in the Detrick labs were turned off during late-night FBI inspections, and this happened on many occasions. Red flag. Why couldn’t evidence have been planted, i.e. were spores of different strains introduced into Detrick beakers to incriminate first Hatfill and/or later Ivins?
I don’t do chemistry, certainly not biochem. Could there have been unexpected interactions between the anthrax vaccine and the psychoactives that Ivins was later prescribed?
I can’t see how this guy kept (or even got in the first place) a high level security clearance. When you get a full blown background investigation, you have to fill out a bundle of forms about your life, including your mental health background. Either he lied or the clearance investigators didn’t dig very deep.
Is there really any uniformity in the granting of security clearances? Does one’s politics play a role? Does having a rich uncle who’s a Wall Street banker?
These may sound like rhetorical questions but I really don’t know. My only experience remotely involving secrecy dates from a childhood in the military in the forties. To my child’s eyes it seemed pretty much a game with few rules.
In any case, the purpose of Ivins’ clearance presumably was to insure he didn’t blab to putative terrorists and spys, not to put him to the test concerning his ability to withstand torture.
I’ll be glad to admit I’m way off base if you say so. As we all can see, things do change in 60 years!
Sorry to take so long to reply. Did dinner, etc.
My experience with clearances is with DoD and contractors. There is supposed to be uniformity within DoD and the Intel world and from personal experience I believe this is pretty true. The forms for contractor clearances (again within DoD and Intel) are consistent with the forms for government employees. The form numbers may be different but the info is the same.
I don’t know of any instance where having a rich uncle or a congressman will get you any cutting of corners, but that’s not to say it doesn’t happen – particularly in the Bushie world. One thing that does frequently happen is that the clearance authorities get a big backlog. People being people, there may be some shortened processes just to get people cleared. It is very possible that external pressure – e.g., a contractor on a very tight schedule with a vocal government customer – may be applied to the system.
Thank you
Follow the money.
Conspiracy Flashback to the Ford Administration – and look who is running the ANTHRAX coverup…
http://www.frankolsonproject.o…..choke.html
The conspiracy originated at the top, in the White House, initiated by Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Cheney. It had just been learned that the CIA allegedly drugged its employee Frank Olson with LSD before his supposed suicide.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200403/mann
The Armageddon Plan
During the Reagan era Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were key players in a clandestine program designed to set aside the legal lines of succession and immediately install a new “President” in the event that a nuclear attack killed the country’s leaders.
Plunger @88 — LSD can cause a metallic taste in the mouth…and psychotic sequelae…very much as Dr. Ivins is reported to say in today’s document dump. Metallic taste, then paranoid episodes, then clearing.
Here’s my evaluation of the case against Ivins:
It’s better than the case against Saddam ever was, but just barely.
Here are two questions I’ve got.
They’re arguing that Ivins’ late night time was used to make anthrax spores. They say he didn’t go back into B3 after the postmark of the second latter “until” October 9. He also goes back in for an extended period on October 14. What was he doing?
Also, in his email extracts, Ivins says on August 12, 2000, thta “Last Sunday, as you probably guessed for my email, was one of the worst days in months.” But they don’t include that email. Why not? If they’re trying to prove he’s crazy, wouldnt one of his self-described worst days be relevant?
Only two? Me, I still want to see the government’s case against Hatfill side by side with Ivins. I betcha they make both look guilty ’cause that’s the goal.
I’ve got a metallic taste in my mouth. It’s…it’s…it’s a fork!
I’m feeling this tingling sensation. It’s…it’s…it’s the jalapenos in my enchiladas!
I think I’d better not work late again tonight…just in case the government feels they have to try, try, try again.
That’s weird because 10/9 was the second postmark date. On 10/9 he could have been analyzing postmortem samples from Bob Stevens. On 10/14 he could have been analyzing samples from the Judy letter, or testing the Iraqi hypothesis.
Interesting —something to keep in mind.
Here’s another question. On September 26, 2001, Ivins says, “I just heard tonight that Bin Laden terrorists for sure have anthrax and sarin gas.” Who told him that? It suggests, at the very least, he was talking to someone in intelligence.
Yr. question #2 upstairs- Not trying to prove Ivins was crazy, just trying to imply it. Cherry picked emails in aid of it.
You’re going to make them very sorry they released what emails they did, aren’t you, ew…
Use of Sarin by Iraq vs Iran 1987-88 was known, as was production or stockpile prior to 1996 ( http://www.cfr.org/publication/9553/)
Would not be surprising that an Army researcher heard that.
I read somewhere (last few days) recently that U.S. approved sending anthrax to Iraq for war with Iran.
Right. But he said AQ, not Iraq.
Sorry, my error. Too much reading….
Here’s what bugs me. They badgered this man to his death. They knew they couldn’t indict. They knew they couldn’t bully him into a confession. So they took this weird approach of hounding but not indicting and, ultimately, getting him to “do the right thing.”
Some elements of the FBI have been known to try that kind of thing for some time.
To see or be reminded of an oldie, scroll down a bit to “Suicide” letter heading; image of referenced letter here.
Yes, we’ve heard rumors that the feds approached his wife, his daughter and his son, saying, so it has been rumored, that Ivins “killed people”.
The intent of this behavior, if true, was, clearly, to frighten and intimidate both Ivins AND his family; had the ‘government’ more than choreographed suspicion and at best, circumstantial ‘evidence’, they would long since have arrested Ivins.
As there is, currently, such a low threshold of perceived ‘justice’ in this nation, the assumption now is that the case is closed and everyone may happily go about their business safe in the belief that ‘all is well’ and the ‘right’ have prevailed.
Which will be as ‘true’ as Saddam’s ‘direct involvement’ in 911.
Obama’s lack of any skepticism whatever, at least publicly, is troubling and certainly reflects a post civil rights ’sensibility’.
“Yes, we’ve heard rumors that the feds approached his wife, his daughter and his son, saying, so it has been rumored, that Ivins “killed people”.”
If true, isn’t this, at a minimum, extremely unprofessional behavior? Libelous, even? Shouldn’t the agent(s) who said such a thing be disciplined– and maybe assigned to jobs that do not involve interaction with people?
Bob in HI
Here’s something I’d like to see: the recommendation for Ivins’ DOD award in March 2003. Was it signed by–say–Paul Wolfowitz, who was almost certainly behind the early claims that Iraq was behind the anthrax attacks?
The perpetrator(s) of these attacks have escaped detection, or at least indictment, for seven years, despite purportedly extensive FBI and other law enforcement resources arrayed against them. (With this government, we have to assume that those resources include all DoD and intelligence agencies.)
That suggests a reasonably crafty, if not brilliant, mind at work. Someone able not only to make or obtain the anthrax, but to disguise its origins and to design a means of disseminating it that would not lead directly back to the perpetrator(s). Methodologies that also avoid the perp(s) doing themselves in, and which avoid leaving obvious tell-tale traces. Which suggests the perp(s) has intimate details of how federal law enforcement and the security around government labs work.
Examining obvious connections a perp might overlook is important. Criminals make mistakes. But envelopes available at the US Post Office? It seems to me those could readily be purchased as a blind, either from the post office next door or from one across the country, depending on the perp(s)’s strategy. How many flights or trains a day go into or out of Metro DC? Not to mention roadways. New York, Buffalo, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Charleston, Louisville, Richmond, Charlotte, and Columbia all lie within a day’s drive of Metro DC. A region rich in government facilities, some of which may be black sites the government refuses to acknowledge. (The BushCheney government? I know….)
That Ft. Detrick and the P.O. from which the envelopes may have come are geographically close doesn’t tell us a whole lot.
I don’t watch Countdown much any more, but the tease line Olbermann just threw off on the Ivins presser, “conviction by proclamation,” was pretty good.
I think it’s important to emphasize how deeply embarrassing it is for the Bush government and its FBI that a US Army researcher, working from a secure, highly restricted-access US Army bio-weapons research facility, might have perpetrated the anthrax attacks on US soil. A crime that led to five deaths and that seven years later remains unsolved.
Can you imagine this administration’s DOJ taking its anthrax case through trial and appeal, subjecting it and related government bio-weapons programs and the FBI’s investigative methods to critical examination by zealous defense attorneys?
This is a government whose top administrators often have no experience except in “public relations”. It is run by its vice president who prizes secrecy and who thinks violating the law is no big deal if he gets what he wants, who sees little difference between defense counsel and those whom they represent, and who thinks nothing of imprisoning the innocent for life so long as he needn’t admit to a mistake.
I see no reason to give the DOJ the benefit of the doubt on any aspect of its case. Had it not lost so much credibility under Ashcroft-Gonzales-Mukasey, that wouldn’t be so. But it has.
Here’s a question. In the November 2007 search of his space at Detrick, they found an ABC.com printout.
I wonder what the printout was about?
“Phenotypic similarities” between what, spores or bacilli? What the heck are they talking about? This isn’t bird-watching, where you can depend on a blue jay always looking different from a bluebird and similar to another blue jay. You can make bacterial cultures go through all sorts of shape-changes by altering growth medium, growth phase, making them recover from starvation … AFAIK, it’s still not well understood, mainly because not many people find it particularly interesting or meaningful.
As I noted earlier today, I’m not sure we understand whether there is a huge number of genetics types of B. anthracis or a small number. If the number is small, say, abcdefg, then getting a and e in two places is not so amazing. If it were to take all the alphabets known to man to name the different types, then, yes, getting a and e together in two places would be a low-probability event and, thus, highly suggestive of a causal relationship.
Maybe spores are genetically highly conservative. One of the things about being a spore is that you just sit there for decades or centuries. You don’t replicate your genome every 15 minutes and pile up mutations.
There are oddball strains of common bugs like E. coli which grow with, say, 15% of the bugs having “hairy” surfaces: start with any bug you like, hairy or non-hairy, grow a culture, and you’ll find the same hairy/non-hairy split. Why? Who knows. Maybe some B. anthracis strain has a similar trick. Anybody grown out the two types in the suspect cultures and whether each type generates both types. Yeah, I know it’s the genome, but weird things happen, especially since we seem to hear about a stretch of the genome flipping end for end (what’s the molecular basis of *that*?).
Very nice to hear that these people invented ‘forensic micro’ on the spur of the moment, but — let’s just say that I’m sceptical. That’s why there’s peer review.
““Phenotypic similarities” between what, spores or bacilli? What the heck are they talking about? This isn’t bird-watching, where you can depend on a blue jay always looking different from a bluebird and similar to another blue jay.”
Why is it so different from bird watching? Perhaps the main difference is that with bird watching, the birds are presumably in their natural habitat, whereas these anthrax cultures are in an artificial environment. You can change how a bluejay looks (i.e, its phenotype) by altering their environment and diet, and a baby bluejay does not look the same as an adult. And a sick, starving bluejay may look different from a healthy one. I understand being skeptical, and I concede that relying on phenotype only gets one so far. But I guess I don’t quite understand your comment, other than to be skeptical about jumping to conclusions based only on phenotype.
Bob in HI
*grin* Yeah, actually the examples I used *were* kinda like sick or immature blue jays, weren’t they? Still, would you accept that day in, day out, blue jays look pretty much the same? They don’t visit the feeder one morning twice as long just because they got up late, or with two heads, or a head the size of a grapefruit. Yet, a given species of bacteria may show a lot of variation both within the same culture at different times and from one culture condition to another: they are longer or shorter, they may have swollen ends or not, bifurcate or not. And the darned thing is, most of the time, such variation is not particularly diagnostic of the species. (OK; in some cases it is.) You can take an perfectly ordinary rod, Gram-positive or Gram-negative, and play around with it to a surprising degree. A complete waste of time, generally, but something that may give one an appreciation of the balance that a bacterial cell is carrying on as it tries to increase its volume by one set of processes and its surface by another largely unrelated set of processes.
Does that make more sense?
Wow where to start–
I’m too tired and lazy to read documents from mutts like Jeff Taylor and the FBI who are DOJsters which means they have a genetic predisposition to lie all the time.
But I did read all Marcy’s blogs and most of the comments, TPM Schmuckmaker and Muckraker, WaPo, NY Times, WSJ
1) I haven’t seen anything definitive that confirms whethe the Anthrax linked to Ivins, so-called ” “RMR-1029″ liquid was 1.5 to 3 microns in diameter coated with a polyglass which tightly bound hydrophilic silica to each particle or not. I’ve seen people claiming it was or it wasn’t and I haven’t read the DOJ docs so if it confirms this let me know.
2) As has been pointed out the description of the filter process he might have used is an umbrella term, so we don’t really know how many other people could have had access t ways to make dry powder out of liquid in the vial. I don’t think we know if the culprit particles were given a weak electrical charge or not as was described by DHS on the cleanup of the Daschle particles in D.C.
3) The DNA genotyping doesn’t restrict Ivins as the only individual that had access to this anthrax originally in liquid form anyway.
4) The strain is ubiquitous on cattle trails accross the country and at the Pastuer institute. A number of individuals had access to it but it would have
been damn hardtaken some ingenuity to make the fine powder out of what was in the vial, and Ivins was far from the only one who could.5) KKG–in high school we had a sorority named that and they were hot. But as a driving motive and circumstantial evidence here it just sucks.
6) Letters to Congress–gee no one from the EW or FDL group of blogs ever gets moved or encouraged to write those do they.
7) The “Death to Israel” rhetoric and the Eagle paper–just ridiculous as to specificity. Too many people could use it.
Nothing presented by the asshole DC USA Jeff Taylor and the FBI Dean of Fuckups is compelling enough to even indict with a grand jury of minimal intelligence.
9) The flask of anthrax as Gerald Posner told KO proves absolutely fucking nothing. There was worldwide access to that anthrax–it wasn’t confined to Detrick.
10) The DNA genotyping they used may wow the public, but it’s not precisely geared to nail microbes nor state of the art. This is meant to wow the public–50% of whom don’t know what party theoretically is in control of Congress although they may be the smarter 50% the way Congress has comported itself.
11) The FBI spent months trying to reverse engineer this Anthrax and couldn’t get it done.
12) From Muckraker Schmuckraker quoting Taulor:
It was a flask that was “created and solely maintained” by Dr. Bruce Ivins, the key suspect who killed himself last week. Others at the lab also had access to the flask, officials said.
And Taylor has proved this how? Because I didn’t hear him offer proof I don’t care how many affidavits he has unsealed that say it.
Taylor said Ivins gave him a bogus anthrax. And he establishes this how? How does Taylor rule out anthrax that was the same strain from the Pastuer institute?
13) After convincing themselves Ivins didn’t give them the correct strain which they say was RMR-1029 and Ivins says he gave them given their suspicion and what they call erratic behavior that they think is outside the scope of someone whose buttons they are continually pushing and given the ways they stalked Hatfill why does it take them two years to get a warrant from a cowed and compliant D.C. district court judge to search Ivins’ home? That’s a long frigging time for this type investigation or anything the Federal Bunglers of Investigation is mucking with.
14) The so-called lympholizer is a generic umbrella term; it’s not the only way to make fine power and prooves very little if anything.
85 – that’s what keeps puzzling me (and making me a little nervous about how they are handling screening in general).
82 – nothing to say it couldn’t that I know of, but I have to wonder if the RMR-1029 had been sourced to other labs, if they snuck something into the lab and substituted it, bc it matched the attack anthrax, if it wouldn’t have shown up with all the testing going on that this new attack anthrax matching RMR-1029 didn’t match with prior samples shipped.
90 – It may have been on the other days there were lab logs indicating the work being done that both a) justify spending that time, and b) include references to sensitive info. That’s playing devil’s advocate. OTOH, if B-3 has net access then WO’s (was it his?) old thread solution of downloading porn sounds as possible then as anything and even if that isn’t the solution, maybe he was going in and spinning his wheels worrying about the anthrax vaccine problem that he was dealing with in the Gulf Syndrom controversy and the subsequent failings relating to the company handling the vaccines. On the email, maybe it was full of redactable info or info revealing someone else’s private info – possibly things about his daughter?
94 – what bothers me even more about it, is by the time they opted for that path (if the allegations are true) they knew they were dealing with someone possibly diagnosed as having paranoid personality disorder. As frustrated and depressed as it might make a normal person, think how much more frustrated and depressed it would make someone suffereing under paranoid delusions.
102 “conviction by proclamation” was pretty much the approach DOJ took to Padilla, what with their *interesting* little presser after they handed him over to be disappeared by the military into black hole abuse for years. It seems to work really well. All you need is a nice haircut and pretty podium for the proclaimers.
109- of course, there’s always the possiblity he was watching some Fox show where someone said such a thing. It seems they said a lot of things at the time that you always knew were without basis (like Hussein’s aluminum tubes having only one use – for nukes) so it could have even been something unprivileged and unreliable (as opposed to privileged and unreliable).
OT – but isn’t it kind of a shame that no one took the opportunity to ask the man at the podium when they were going to get around to enforcing the Miers and Bolton and Rove subpoenas – after all, no mysteries there about who they need to nab.
Hey I’m with you Mary. I would have pounced on that schmuck Jeff Taylor with exactly that when he used the term that is completely an oxymoron when it comes to this investigation “laser like.” I almost fell out of the chair. And when I see Jeff Taylor I have no other reason to think Bush shill/little Federalist robot.
He sure won’t apply a laser to Bolten, and Miers or the US Attorney scandal.
I take your point about emphatic-ness. I didn’t re-link in this post because I said most of what I have to say on the subject in a comment on an earlier thread, here:
Evidence of weaponization/coatings would be scientists who have examined the Daschle/Leahy samples saying that the spores are coated or that a substance has been added to them.
There are people who’ve followed the anthrax story in considerable detail since the attacks. When I did a bunch of online reading on it two years ago, and then again recently, it seemed to me that Ed Lake was the most valuable of those who’ve looked hard at the subject.
No one is without axes to grind. But his ax is ‘hewing as close as possible to known and verifiable facts’, where others seem to have a conclusion to which they want to come. Lake himself developed a theory, and — human beings being what we are — has become probably somewhat attached to it, testing his commitment to facts as they appear. He’s not inclined to buy the story being pitched today, but for different reasons than many here.
But he’s performed an invaluable service in casting a skeptical idea on the leaps that people from all schools of thought have made on various aspects of the case. One of these, I’d argue one of the most important of them, is the idea that there were coatings on the anthrax in the letters. On that point, I’ve become a “Lake-ist”. I’m not going to argue it back and forth in comments here; either the case he makes is convincing, or it’s not. It’s backed up by the comment FBI scientist Beecher made in August 2006, which created a stir in the investigation as recounted in the Chemical & Engineering News overview of December 2006. I realize, though, that at this point, saying that an FBI scientist says something is not exactly an argument in favor of the no-coatings p.o.v.
Here at EW-land, leaps are a way of life. Because this regime we’re ruled by has specialized in secrecy, lies, stonewalling, and a generally criminal approach to governance, that’s been a valuable skill. But political intrigue is different from something that combines science, crime, and political intrigue. And in this case, sadly, we don’t have court proceedings to open up a wide range of evidence and look at it from multiple angles (as in the Libby trial). It’s looking as if we never will. So it will take some future process to bring any kind of closure.
The warmongerings in the Executive and Fourth Branches, and their claque in the media and pundit worlds, took advantage of the anthrax letters. But they weren’t able to do more than create a strong impression of linkage to Iraq, and fear of possible similar attack from Iraq, because too early in the process it became too clear that the substance had a domestic origin — specifically from the military’s own stocks of the Ames strain.
The question is how long ago it left the mil labs, and where the spores were produced and refined. Without a lot more evidence and examination and discussion of the evidence by competent discussants, it’s pretty hard to say.
Until you see scientific documentation as to those particles, size, coated or not, or charge you’re leaping to conclusions like a ninth grade gym class doing jumping jacks.
No one knows at this point because they haven’t seen reports and colating conventional wisdom isn’t getting anyone closer to knowing.
I sure find it ridiculous that they have used Vetter or any other geneticists and can conclude that the only labs in the world to have the anthrax strain hybrid they analyzed are in two in the US as the LA Times article complacently reports that I linked. I’m not buying this investigation’s conclusion, Lake and everything else I’ve read.
I wish I could have said that so well as you do.
I have no preference for mil/non-mil provenance, in part because I am unable to evaluate the evidence or can’t trust the evidence as being genuine. It is an interesting question, however. If the original purpose of the anthrax attack was to provide a pretext for invading Iraq in 2002 I can see how it would be desirable to make the spores look like a crude third world product. On the other hand, if the shock of the attack was meant to carry us directly into war with Saddam there most likely would have been no investigation — and the putative plotters might have used the simplest source which just might have been military.
I don’t have a good grasp of what happened when, but have a fuzzy recollection that the reason the story shifted from the Cheney Saddam-AlQ-Atta conspiracy to crazy lone American bio-war researcher was because analysis of the attack spores indicated a US military provenance. Could this whole FBI saga have been some kind of diversion? Opposition from the very bowels of military and government? An actual example of Cheney-Rumsfeld not getting their way for once (about Iraq) — they and we and most of all the poor folks at FtD having to settle for this very distressing obfuscation??
The attack was in 2001 and the shock of the attack was such a game changer that 7 years later we have no mroe defense against it then we had then. We have 60,000 vaccines stockpiled that would work to defend if given in a series over about two years against cutaneous anthrax and most of the attacks were designed with powder to kill via the lungs.
We have stupid state governments buying Tamiflu with a few million bucks that has nothing to do with H5N1 pandemics except to help them mutate and become more resistant.
I didn’t hear “laser quick” Jeff Taylor talk about that as he selectively presented his story and kept significant scientific evidence if it even exists away from the public.
Yes that sure is a major question and without its answer we don’t have a clue who sent the Anthrax and neither does the US government.
Sorry, I thought I hit ‘reply’, but my 121 above is in response to bobschacht at 105.
This article doesn’t quote a line of thought that would confine the anthrax they say they have analyzed with a “signature” to only a couple places in the US, and to me that’s flawed thinking:
Anthrax blend led FBI to Ivins
To assume that the anthrax they tested could only come from two places in the US is a hell of an assmuption.
I think there are people very happy with the FBI and Jeff Taylor tonight and they aren’t your friend and they aren’t dead.
I would assume that Hatfill details not already public would now be sealed as result of settlement agreement. Which would be very convenient. I’d expect it not necessarily because of Feds wanting secrecy or Hatfill wanting no further publicity but because lawyers tend to do this with civil settlements out of obligatory habit. So similarities and common evidence will be difficult to come by.
“The investigation has shown that in 2000 and through the mailings in 2001, Dr.
Ivins had mental health issues. …Through the e-mails it was determined that Dr. Ivins was undergoing significant stress in both his home and work life. The mental health issues and stress were significant to the extent that Dr. Ivins sought professional help from a psychiatrist and was immediately prescribed medication that started in February 2000.”
From email April 3,2000, “Occasionally I get this tingling that goes down both arms.
At the same time I get a bit dizzy and get this unidentifiable “metallic” taste in my
mouth….Other times it’s like I’m not only sitting at my desk doing work, I’m also a few feet away watching me do it. There’s nothing like living in both the first person singular
AND the third person singular!”
Metallic taste is a commonly reported side effect of anti-depressants.
Here are some reported side effects of Celexa:
Taste Problems
Numbness and Tingling
Loss of Memory
Paranoia
Loss of One’s Own Sense of Reality or Identity
Having Thoughts of Suicide
Doesn’t really get to the matter of his guilt or innocence, just though it was worth noting…
Besides my points what he said –Mr. Greenwald:
a href=”http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/”>The FBI’s selective release of documents in the anthrax caes: [Jeff Taylor Tries to Zoom a Public He has Total Contempt For with Crappy Science]
Jeff Taylor Tries to Zoom a Public He Holds in Total Contempt With Crap Science or The FBI’s selective release of documents in the anthrax case
From Glenn:
If I read correctly, Ivins produced a first sample of RMR-1029 anthrax for the FBI in February 2002. He doesn’t follow protocol (whatever that means) and must give a second sample.
The second sample of RMR-1029, when tested, does not match the evidentiary samples from victims. This is April 2002.
A third sample or RMR-1029, slanted in the presence of an FBI SA in the B3 containment room, is sealed, then stored in B3 freezers which themselves are sealed with evidence tape. April 2004.
In June of 2004, it is these samples which are forwarded to the Navy Medical Research Center in Silver Spring, MD. It also is these samples which are reported as a match to the evidentiary samples from victims (i.e., the samples exhibit the tell-tale 4 mutations that identify them as a particular sub-type of Ames).
On the basis of this positive match, Ivins becomes a prime suspect.
Question: can we demonstrate chain of custody all the way from Detrick to NMRC? Can we access the results of the NMRC tests? Who had de facto authority over that facility at that time, and did other samples tested there also match the evidentiary samples?
Question: Only the first mailings match the tell-tale 4 mutations strain definitively. The second mailings — the Post and Brokaw powders — are contaminated with a specific strain of b. subtilis. Both the Post and Brokaw samples contain precisely the same strain, but that strain is different from other known isolates of b. subtilis.
Search warrant affidavit 07-528-M-01 properly concludes that the Post and Brokaw powders derive from a production event separate from the production event that generated the powders contained in the first mailings, but cannot explain the differences in batches other than to suggest that the vial of RMR-1029 is the parent to both.
Comment: The FBI cannot prove the provenance of batch #2. Obviously it was grown and processed at a separate time, and perhaps at a separate location, from batch #2.
Question: Since the strain of b. subtilis apparently is unique, might it be possible that it derives from an experimental, controlled strain emanating from some lab or other and not from simple ambient contamination? If so, what lab? Where is the matching vial of b. subtilis ?
JA
Question: Only the first mailings match the tell-tale 4 mutations strain definitively. The second mailings — the Post and Brokaw powders — are contaminated with a specific strain of b. subtilis. Both the Post and Brokaw samples contain precisely the same strain, but that strain is different from other known isolates of b. subtilis.
The first mailings (postmarked Sept. 18) were to media offices – the NY Post and NBC (whose letters were found), but also including the Florida office of AMI, and ABC and CBS in New York (where letters were not found, but people developed anthrax disease). The anthrax found in the Post and NBC letters was clumpy and brownish. More cases of cutaneous anthrax developed than of inhalation.
The second mailings (postmarked Oct. 9) were to Sens. Daschle and Leahy. Both letters were found; the anthrax was tan, very fine and “floaty”, and very pure. More cases of inhalation disease developed than cutaneous.
Those are baselines for discussion.
Can you correct/clarify your question to help us understand which batch the question refers to?
Nell @ 138.
I think I reversed the order of the mailings, but my fundamental point is that the Post & Brokaw powders contained a strain of b. subtilis not found in the other mailings, nor found in known captive strains of b. subtilis .
To my mind, this means that the Post & Brokaw powders came from a different batch, and perhaps a different hand at a different location, than the other powders, and therefore require a definitive chain of evidence and proof all their own.
I don’t see that chain of proof in the documents released yesterday.
JA
The FBI agents involved in this cas had a backlog of performance evaluations to fill out, stat.
Neil — I hear you, and maybe your buddy Ed Lake is right; we certainly know people who don’t have traditional credentials that can rip up bullshit and call it what it is.
But I do not believe that based on the sketchy information that we have about chain of custody of any of the anthrax that even Mr. Lake can say conclusively that the anthrax researchers have seen was exactly the same anthrax used in the attacks.
I tend to trust my gut at this point — since it’s failed me less than the government — that whatever the anthrax was that was used in the attacks, that it couldn’t be readily duplicated being somewhat specialized, and yet the DNA matched that of a U.S. lab. Both of these points have been repeated with consistency, and neither of these points are things that the powers that be would want published if they were true.
A coated anthrax generated from an American lab could certainly match these stories.
And coated or not, it still strains comprehension that a “lone gunman” did this in his spare time, made a batch or more of a highly specialized anthrax product in a couple extra hours here and there.
Strikes me that one of the absolutely WORST places to run off a batch of a few trillion spores would be Fort Detrick. Someone comes in the next morning or mornings and says, “What the heck did you use all the glassware and medium for last night?! How come all the centrifuge tubes are in the autoclave?” It would seem to me there would be lots of questions, and Detrick never struck me as a warm and forgiving, fuzzy place. Of course, anthrax being what it is, I can’t rightly come up with ANY place I’d like to whip up a batch of spores, either. Unless it was somewhere set up to do just that and where no one would miss the odd gram or two.
If the FBI didn’t talk to Nancy L. Haigwood until last week, did they then tell Duley about the poisonings? Or did Duley send the FBI to Haigwood?