Did Dr. Ivins Act ALONE????

[Junkdrawer]

Let’s do something silly and take the FBI’s evidence at its word. Not their conclusions, some of which are just plain laughable, but their evidence. Where does that lead?

Well, again assuming that the DNA, email, and access badge evidence are reliable, we have a man who was agitated after 9/11 with the thought that there well could be an anthrax attack on the US or Israel, spending an unusual amount of time in an anthrax lab, providing the anthrax that was later delivered to the victims.

What we don’t have is any method of weaponizing the anthrax, any proof that he delivered that weaponized anthrax to the New Jersey mailbox, and only the most ridiculous of speculated motives.

So, what if, sometime around 9/11, someone from private industry enlisted the good doctor in a scheme to develop a new and improved anthrax vaccine – off the books. What if they asked him to provide several anthrax cultures for their work? And if the good doctor went along, wouldn’t that be something that he would have hidden in deathly fear of discovery?

Look at it from the other side. If Cheney & Co. needed a false-flag anthrax attack, wouldn’t they have gone to a corrupt private company with an offer of a multi-billion dollar anthrax vaccine contract if only they would provide them with a small amount of off-the-books weaponized anthrax? Anthrax that couldn't later be traced right back to said industry lab.

Now, here’s the rub: If the FBI had arrested Ivins and charged him with the anthrax murders, wouldn’t he have then spilled the beans and offered to reveal his industry sources in exchange for a reduced sentence?

Well, his “suicide” prevented all that.

[TexasObserver]

1. Of course not, and he may not have been involved at all.

They needed a scapegoat, and they needed him to die now, without having an ability to put on a defense. Lee Harvey Ivins is IT.

[Supersedeas]

29. right, that assumes Ivins was responsible when there are huge gaps in the evidence

even against him.

[Prefer]

2. Exactly.

And that explains how the Dr. knew about the "islamofascist" Anthrax before it was sent, and how the "High Officials" also knew and started taking cipro before it was sent.

And it explains how they all knew about the propaganda purpose of linking it to Iraq, even though that information was false.

This Anthrax was the psychological fodder in the fear that sold the war. Even Powell went to the UN with his mock Anthrax to terrorize everyone with it.

Terror is about shaping popular notions and populations. The language in Bush and Rice in speeches following 911 and Anthrax was "We're changing America".

I don't see how a resonable person can look at 911 and Anthrax and say - Yeah it was some Muslims who had a purpose". I just don't see where this terrorism supposedly attributed to "Islamofascists" fits into any plan that they would have. I don't see the benefit.

What I do see is the PNAC long term plan to shape America and I see the "Islamofascist" plan dovetailing perfectly into their long range plan as if it were made to order.

I see the war was completely based on lies manufactured to deceive a population.

I see men of integrity distanced themselves early from the toxic leadership - even Tom Ridge said all the terror warnings were FAKE!!!

So, with all of this in mind, I just do see how any thing person can;t see through this charade!

[Junkdrawer]

3. We're only seeing excerpts of one side (Invins) of the emails...

we don't know if Ivins was instigating the anthrax attack fears or responding to them.

And, yes, the Cheney Cipro use does indeed suggest foreknowledge.

[EstimatedProphet]

4. I'm not buying it

There's maybe a dozen people in the country who would be able to get weaponized anthrax. Even then, they probably are never alone when they have it, and are certainly monitored. The government has all their personal info from background checks they would have to have in order to get their jobs in the first place. No way can I believe that they are just finding out now who did this, and then he suddenly committed suicide. The criminal investigation of a dozen people doesn't take 6 years. they would have known it was him the day after the first attack, if their story were true.

[Junkdrawer]

5. Dr. Meryl Nass' blog is a must-read....

She notes the same holes (and more) that I noted:

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2008/08/beyond-reasonable-doubt.html

For the record: I'm not suggesting she shares my "Ivins was a dupe of private industry" theory.

[Muttocracy]

6. that's a great resource - glad to know someone who knows more about it than I

has some of the same questions!

[Junkdrawer]

9. Dr. Nass knew Ivins professionally and has said that the profile in the news...

didn't match the man she knew.

[hlthe2b]

7. Did he act AT ALL?

Let's start THERE.

[Junkdrawer]

8. Agreed. My post is premised on taking the FBI's evidence at it's word...

and, given their behavior in this case, that's a stretch.

[TZ]

34. You know my creds

And I do have personal knowledge of people in both the anthrax vaccine program and at Detrick.
I've suspected for a long time that it was someone associated with the vaccine program..I actually do think Irvins was involved. However..there is NO WAY he was alone..(I am convinced by the DNA evidence and the lab records which show him in the labs at certain times when he shouldn't have been..those records are usually pretty reliable)

[Junkdrawer]

10. Interesting response to this theory over at Dr. Nass' blog...

I've wondered about the apparent lack of investigation of private industry too. I lived in Princeton in 2001 and the first thought I had at the time was all those biotech labs that exist right in the immediate Princeton area. It's not for nothing that Princeton author Richard Preston made the NJ biotech corridor the locale for many of the misdeeds in his writings. THAT would make sense of mailing the envelopes from a Princeton address, something that makes NO sense now. The anthrax source could still easily have come from Ft. Detrick, right?


http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2008/08/beyond-reasonable-doubt.html?showComment=1218123060000#c4754486507282247404

[EFerrari]

11. Things that make you go "hmmmmmmmmmm". Last night,

a DUer was showing us a Goggle tool where you can search searches. When I searched "Bruce Ivins", the areas that showed the most searches were NY, MD and NJ. The graphs of NY and MD has flatlined or were declining. NJ was still spiking up pretty steeply.

It makes no sense for someone to drive from Frederick all the way to Princeton to MAIL anthrax.

[EFerrari]

12. I'd ask a different question.

Who asked Ivins for a sample to use in their lab after January 20, 2001? :shrug:

[Junkdrawer]

13. I asked the "alone" question because the FBI went WAY out of their way...

at the press conference to assure everyone the Ivins did it and he acted alone.

Especially damning in that there's not one shred of evidence that he acted alone and tons of evidence that, at best, he needed a partner or two to pull this off.

[EFerrari]

17. Sure. Most credible experts say he could not have done this alone.

FBI wants this whole case to go away immediately. If he acted alone, they're now off the hook.

Did anyone in the administration or in Congress comment yesterday? I'm not seeing anything.

[suffragette]

30. Greenwald has a quote from Rep. Rush Holt

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/06/fbi_documents/index.html


Wednesday Aug. 6, 2008 16:11 EDT
UPDATE II:
Rep. Rush Holt today received a briefing from the FBI Director and just said this:

I appreciate the preliminary briefing that FBI Director Mueller gave me today. I am pleased the FBI finally has begun to answer the questions that the families of the victims have had for nearly seven years. While the circumstantial evidence pointing to Dr. Ivins that the Department of Justice released today is compelling, a number of important questions remain unanswered, such as why investigators remained focused on Dr. Hatfill long after they had begun to suspect Dr. Ivins of the crime and why investigators are so certain that Ivins acted alone. In addition, there are important policy questions for handling any future incidents of bioterrorism. I will continue to conduct additional oversight on this issue over the course of the next several months.

Sounds like he's asking some of the same questions we are.

[EFerrari]

31. But where is BushCo? No one had a presser?

:shrug:

[suffragette]

32. They are just hoping it will all fade away

or get drowned out by the next news story.

I think they and the FBI expected this to be done by last Monday: Friday news dump, compliant press articles, weeknd reports of case being closed, Monday closure. It didn't happen that way only because of the outcry so they had to scramble to assemble their selective show and tell. Even the media that was reporting completely uncritically had to start questioning a bit, we shamed them into it.

I noticed the day before the Wednesday press conference, an AP article stated "Still, skeptics may never be satisfied if the documents fail to show conclusively that Ivins was solely responsible for mailing the anthrax letters that killed five and sickened 17 in the weeks following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington" in regards to the evidence the FBI was going to present the next day. I think that was purposeful, so much to say that some people will continue to question whatever the case and to prepare for the shutdown of the case. They tried to float an article titled "Case Closed," but it is currently being outweighed by ones that say that with a question mark or even more strongly note the many valid questions still being asked.

We have to keep up the questioning and the pressure and deny BushCo the attention shift they want.

[Junkdrawer]

41. Exactly Correct

:thumbsup:

[suffragette]

23. Meryl Nass is making great points about this

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/


More than 100 people had access
The shiny new methods of "microbial forensics," touted by the FBI for months as offering a new break in the case, have in fact revealed little or nothing. As the New York Times' Scott Shane and Eric Lichtblau reveal, "officials admitted that more than 100 people had access to the supply of anthrax that matched the powder in the letters."

But the same article notes that FBI conclusively decided Hatfill had no access to the letters' anthrax, even though he was working at Fort Detrick during the time this strain of anthrax was stored there. If the FBI conclusively decided this (though the evidence appears weak), why haven't they provided Hatfill with a full exoneration? The FBI's logic is incomprehensible. I am not trying to finger Hatfill, who I believe is innocent. Just trying to understand the FBI.

and

4. Ivins was the "sole custodian" of the strain. But the strain was grown in 1997, and many people had access to it over that four year period. Having received a sample, or obtained it surreptitiously, they would be "custodians" of it too.


She has the links to more info on her site.

We all need to ask that question, loudly and repeatedly.
ETA: "Ivins was the "sole custodian" of the strain" is one of the allegations by the FBI. Added to clarify

[EFerrari]

27. Definitely -- a lot of people had access.

I'd like to see who got access after Bush was appointed.

[Junkdrawer]

40. "You know who benefited:"....

* The bioevangelists, who have made a ton of bucks on the threat

* The Neocons, looking for an excuse to attack Iraq. The Iraqis may not have attacked the World Trade Center, but by golly, everyone knew they had anthrax!

* Those seeking to consolidate more power in the executive branch, increase the surveillance of Americans, get rid of Habeus Corpus, and on and on.

* The anthrax vaccine manufacturer, Bioport. Guess what? Its CEO, Fuad El-Hibri and his company Intervac bought Bioport in 1998 with $3 Million down. The day before he bought it, the Army agreed to indemnify it for him, for free. Then contracts totalling hundreds of millions of dollars started rolling in.

* Twice last week, one day after Ivins went into the hospital with an overdose, and one day after Ivins died, El Hibri sold some of his shares in the company, for $200 Million. Did he think the company would get some extra scrutiny and its share price plummet? Although the shares were reportedly sold "automatically," if you review the price fluctuations, that would appear unlikely.

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2008/08/beyond-reasonable-doubt.html

[suffragette]

42. Did you see her newest?

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2008/08/emergent-biosolutions-dropped-23-today.html

Emergent Biosolutions dropped 23% today
Guess El-Hibry knew what he was doing when he sold $200 million in shares of the anthrax vaccine manufacturer last week, since the vaccine company Emergent Biosolutions reported poor net earnings despite sales being up 88% this quarter. On sales of nearly 16,000 shares last week, he would have lost about $50 million, had he sold today instead.

What is the legal definition of insider trading?

Note that some of the documents released by the FBI yesterday detail many past problems at this vaccine factory.

She is hammering away at every piece of this.

[robertpaulsen]

14. Didn't one of his brothers say something about him being involved with the wrong people?

Trying to google for it, but I'm not sure who said it, brother, colleague or friend. But I remember reading something like that.

[Junkdrawer]

15. He didn't see the "I'm glad he's dead" brother since 1985...

so I'd guess that was a colleague or friend.

The FBI itself talked about pressure from outside industry. Later, I'll look for a cite.

[robertpaulsen]

16. That was Tom. There was another brother Charles.

According to NPR, he's not talking. But I thought he made a comment the first day the news hit. Maybe he's been warned to be quiet.

[hunter]

26. "The wrong people" could be read as U.S. bioweapons research.

It'd be one thing if the United States was the upstanding open democracy it pretends to be, but it's not.

People who get sucked into the dark machine hoping to do something positive for God and Country often end up as errand boys for the devil.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. Is there evidence...

even circumstantial evidence that he had an accomplice?

[Junkdrawer]

19. How did he get the anthrax to NJ?....

How did he weaponize the anthrax?

How were his industry contacts exonerated?

Compare his "motives" with the motives of a new $50 billion industry.

Who gave Cheney the "heads up" to start taking Cipro?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. Doesn't really answer my question.

Have you got an answer for my question?

[Junkdrawer]

21. We haven't seen ALL the FBI's evidence. Since he's dead and there's no trial...

they are under no obligation to reveal evidence that points to an accomplice.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. That's true.

If they had evidence of an accomplice, they'd be obligated not to speak on the subject.

[EFerrari]

25. Well, he would need one to process the anthrax

and to transport it to New Jersey because there's no evidence that he could or did do those things.

And, an accomplice might have a motive, too, which would also be nice.

[EFerrari]

24. Check out who in this article is lauding the "compelling" case:

Analysis: Case against Ivins not airtight

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer

Thursday, August 7, 2008

snip

Two New Jersey congressman who sat through a private briefing Wednesday came to differing conclusions.

"It is a very compelling case," said Republican Rep. Chris Smith.

Democratic Rep. Rush Holt said he is worried the FBI may have repeated mistakes in looking at Hatfill when they turned their attention to Ivins.

"In both cases, they were looking back in the history of a quirky personality to suggest because of the quirky personality maybe the person would be malicious," Holt said. "That's a leap that you don't usually make in court."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/08/06/national/w161853D58.DTL

[Muttocracy]

28. Holt was just on NPR saying he's trying to organize hearings. nt

[skip fox]

33. I'm thinking in a parallel manner.

It could have been at admin's behest. OR they might have done it another way and eliminated Ivins to stop the active phase of the investigation since something could come yet out in it or during the trial of Ivins.

WHATEVER . . . the killing of oneself in a painful, drawn-out manner (large amounts of Tylenol and Codeine), which is even iffy by some accounts, is NOT what one would expect of this type of scientist!

Good seeing you Junkdrawer.

[skip fox]

35. Do you know anything about committing suicide with Tylenol with Codeine.

Looking for answers to a series of questions here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3747034

Or anything else you know about the matter.

[Junkdrawer]

36. I'm still fuzzy on the circumstances of his "suicide"...

I've read that he was at home and I've read that he was in the hospital.

No suicide note...so we don't know why he did it (in his own words)

No autopsy...so we don't know if it was his liver(Tylenol) or his breathing(Codeine) that gave out.

[Kaleko]

37. What we have ample evidence for is that the White House wanted to link

the anthrax attacks to Muslim terrorists in general and Iraq specifically.

If this report is credible, which I don't know yet, the theory of a lone perpetrator - and a Catholic democrat like Ivins at that - is simply preposterous.



FBI was told to blame Anthrax scare on Al Qaeda by White House officials

BY JAMES GORDON MEEK
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Saturday, August 2nd 2008

WASHINGTON - In the immediate aftermath of the 2001 anthrax attacks, White House officials repeatedly pressed FBI Director Robert Mueller to prove it was a second-wave assault by Al Qaeda, but investigators ruled that out, the Daily News has learned.

More here: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/08/02/2008-08-02_fbi_was_told_to_blame_anthrax_scare_on_a.html

[blues90]

38. May as well ask who killed JFK or RFK

Or who was behind 9/11. I doubt we will ever know the truth. All I have is my own gut feeling.

[Junkdrawer]

39. JFK, RFK and MLK had Lone Gunmen...This was a Lone Scientist...

Very Different... :sarcasm: