Most of reporting uncritically based on Duley's restraining order hearing audio

[suffragette]

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=8440

Creighton makes some good points about how "Based largely on the audio recording of her testimony filed just 2 days before his "-suicide"-, the MSM is trying this man in the press, post-mortem, with absolutely zero regard for the fact that these are simply allegations put out there by one person who admittedly had already been meeting with the FBI, and without any corroborating evidence." He also notes that much of what Duley is saying is hearsay.

The audio is on the left-hand side of this NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/us/02scientist.html?_r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1217787170-lMwSJKQHx6KzZ/fgXEE+KA

Here's a direct link:http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/audio/national/20080802scientist.mp3

As Creighton notes, "According to her statement, his "threats"- to her on the phone message was him calling her up angry because, as she puts it, "she was helping the FBI FRAME HIM"-!!!
Don't see that in many of the MSM stories, do you?"

Very interesting statement, that.


Also, I noticed after listening to the audio that Duley alleges (my word choice, now why haven't I seen it used in the reporting on this story) that the threats she says Ivins' made were made during a group session. In spite of the large amount of stories on this, I have yet to see other members of that group making statements about this, not even anonymously, to protect their identity.


Hmmm.

[EFerrari]

1. Exactly. Where is the rest of that group?

And who was the supervising doctor?

And why isn't this heroine talking to the press now that she's "safe"?

The questions pile up, don't they?

[EFerrari]

2. Oh -- one more: What does her boyfriend, McFadden do?

Why is he saying she's in "an undisclosed location" instead of something less melodramatic like "not available for comment" or "with her family"?

[defendandprotect]

5. Who is she hiding from . . . ? Ivins is dead . . . !!!

[suffragette]

6. All his statements are odd

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1452847

Duley told the court she had been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury Friday. She was reluctant to become involved in the FBI's investigation of Ivins, McFadden said. "She had to quit her job and is now unable to work, and we have spent our savings on attorneys."

McFadden would not provide any specific information about Duley's involvement with Ivins or the investigation.

"Jean is the kind of person who believes her life is insignificant in comparison with the kind of damage Dr. Ivins is capable of," he said. "She sacrificed all this stuff because she wanted to do the right thing. She'll soon reveal what many wouldn't because they didn't want to be involved with it."

Why would she have to quit her job?
Why spend savings on attorneys? Is there some case going on against her?
What is this about revealing what many wouldn't?

Undisclosed location - now who does that remind me of?

[EFerrari]

8. Another thing: the restraining order. In an emergency,

you can usually get a temp order by calling the police. They fill out a form and make a call to a judge. Then, later, you go to a hearing. But in the instant, your safety trumps bureaucracy.

So, did she get a TRO first or not?

If no, why? Of course, there would be no audio of a private conversation with a cop. :shrug:

[suffragette]

12. Great point

And no audio means no item the press can then repeat info from, for the most part without even citing that as the source of that info.

Nor are they reporting on parts of the audio that don't fit the storyline.

In the audio, Duley notes that "my assigned FBI agent actually very much suggested that I get a protection order."

So, she got it because the FBI agent told her should? And she noted that after the judge said something about Duley saying the FBI not being able to protect her even though she is cooperating with them? WTF?

When she cites the voicemails she says Ivins left her (and that the FBI now has), Duley makes a point of saying how they scared her, how he's "rambling" and "ranting." But the parts she brings up don't match that. The 1st one she cites that Ivins said "obviously we no longer have a therapeutic relationship" and how could she do this to him. The 2nd one is the one Creighton noticed about it being Duley's fault that now the FBI can "get" him.

[EFerrari]

13. If she'd gotten a TRO, there would be nothing in the public record yet

and her hearing likely wouldn't even be scheduled yet. :shrug:

And the FBI can't protect her? WTF, indeed.

[suffragette]

15. If you haven't listened to it yet, go do that.

There are quite a few oddities in it like that.

You've got a good ear and might catch more that I haven't.

[EFerrari]

16. When she describes what he's doing, it's all in cliches --

"blaze of glory", "take everyone out with him", "roaming the streets", they "weren't going to take him out without a fight". She says that Ivins described to the group in detail what he was planning, but she can't produce any detail, can she?

She says she knew him "so well" and that he "plots and plans" but she doesn't give a single concrete example of that behavior.

And the questioner (Duley's attorney?) is leading in her questions. She doesn't ask Duley to clarify or to flesh out anything.

When she introduces the idea that "as far back as the year 2000", he's tried to "murder people", there is no supporting evidence. It's just free standing, isn't it? And no one interrupts her to ask her wtf she's talking about. If she sat on this for more than a week, wouldn't she be liable, as a mental health provider, for not reporting? This is the most scripted part, imho.

Ditto for his diagnosis. If he had been DX'd as a sociopath, he'd have been history from his job.

And, as you heard, she can't get through a whole sentence without hesitating: "Um, um, um".

This tape may be very valuable, imho, to someone who wants to drill down and find out what is really happening here.

[suffragette]

17. Yes, all very cliched and general except for the voicemails

There she gives the lead-up about them scaring her, but the content of what she cites from then don't match the spin she puts on them.

Ivins saying "obviously we no longer have a therapeutic relationship" is pretty straightforward and much more specific and less cliched than other parts. Then, after the buildup and spin, she notes he "calmly" said she ruined his life. So, the few specifics she gives that aren't cliched show no indication of the accusations she flings around during the rest of the hearing.

I think it's a judge asking the questions, at least from the reports on it. I went to the Maryland District Court site and couldn't find the case there. I'd like to see the full transcript of this. (Did find what looks like a reckless driving charge against Duley from 2006)

Agree that it sounds scripted and like more like she's trying to remember the script than actual events.

[EFerrari]

18. The judge is a man and he chimes in at the end.

And, can you feature someone who says "We no longer have a therapeutic relationship" also saying "I'm roaming around the streets looking for someone to stab"?

Btw, at the WaHo, a poster says they found DUIs of hers there but I couldn't find them myself.

[suffragette]

20. It doesn't make sense, does it?

Go to this link, then put in her name and you'll find it: http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/processDisclaimer.jis

Her testimony seems to me to be full of half truths and wild innuendo. And as you note, her statements don't correlate at all.

Time for me to speculate:

So, the FBI visits Jean Duley and asks/pressures her to cooperate on this investigation. Who knows what they bring up in doing that, but a fairly recent (2006) DUI wouldn't look too good for someone who's providing dependency counseling. She does, telling them things Ivins has said while under the stress and harassment he's faced from the FBI, but there's a problem. Only a few situations allow her to violate the confidentiality of a patient, one being threat of imminent harm to one's self or others. Ivins finds out she's been doing this, probably from the FBI telling him and saying confess now because we can use this info to get you. (And that info could have just been statements of anger and frustration at the whole situation and the duress on him and his family). So he calls her and leaves 2 voicemails: the 1st formally severing the counselor relationship and either explicitly or implicitly accusing her of breaching confidentiality, the 2nd accusing her of working with the FBI to blame/railroad him on the anthrax charges. She goes to her assigned FBI contact (that really is noteworthy) and says what now? I've violated this and I think I could lose my job and career. The FBI person suggests she gets the restraining order (the true part) and gives her suggestions on how she can exaggerate/twist the info to make a case for imminent harm. Of course, this also works to buttress the case the FBI is making. (sidenote: curious how they are now able to make it in the press rather than in court themselves) She goes to court and we hear how that proceeds. The media complies by just providing the extracts from the audio that support the accusations.

[EFerrari]

21. I have many friends who are drug counselors.

They all have a history and are all human, so your suggestion is very plausible.

There is one thing that bothers me, though. She's not an M.D. She couldn't have had him hospitalized. Someone else with hospital privileges had to do that or at very least, sign off on that.

She's being put out there in public to a degree. Who is the man or woman behind the screen? :shrug:

[suffragette]

22. Who is behind the screen?

That's a good question.

I think the court proceeding triggered the hospitalization.
I could be wrong on that. I'll look it up and get back to you.

I have to run some errands and run for the bus.

[EFerrari]

23. A doctor with privileges has to do the actual hospitalization.

:shrug:

[suffragette]

24. You're right

That part is just not there, is it?
Some articles note that the police went to pick him up after Duley's hearing, then he is hospitalized.

[suffragette]

25. I know many counselors, though few who are specifically drug counselors

Seems to me the 1st step Duley would take if she felt herself or any of her group threatened would be to go to her superiors and discuss it with them. At that point, they would take action. Yet another oddity in this, since that isn't indicated anywhere. Or if it is, I haven't seen it.

Back to speculation again:
I don't think her reckless driving need even have played a role. They might have tried pressuring the other staff at the Counseling center, but those more experienced ones didn't break confidentiality and give them what they wanted. Who better to pressure than a young, inexperienced person who might be tripped up or led along more easily.
That would also put the statement by her fiance in a different light:"She had to quit her job and is now unable to work, and we have spent our savings on attorneys." Maybe she quit the job and spent so much consulting on attorneys because she knew she violated confidentiality.

Haven't seen any statements from senior staff at that center. It will be interesting to see what they have to say IF they make a statement at all.

[EFerrari]

26. There's no reason for her to have quit her job that we know of.

He wasn't threatening her at work. (She'd have have a witness from work and it doesn't look like she has one?) She wasn't fired and wouldn't be for talking to the FBI although that was likely improper.

Maybe there was some other reason for her to be at home, like wiretaps. :shrug:

[suffragette]

27. It really shows that once you scratch the surface of this

there are still more questions than answers.

Just wish those who still call themselves investigative journalists would ask more of those questions instead of just typing what they receive as "news."

Wiretaps? As in she is wiretapped or?

[EFerrari]

28. If she was co-operating with FBI, she could have agreed to a tap.

I still don't get what they could have spent money on lawyers for. There is no outstanding suit and so little time for even the opening moves.

[suffragette]

29. Hadn't thought of that - good point on the tap

That's what made that bit on all the money they spent on lawyers stand out.
I don't get it either, unless (again with the speculation) it's connected with why she left her job and she was consulting with them. Again, that just applies if Ivins didn't actually make any threats and she released confidential records or info, then created the rest with her assigned FBI agent.

[EFerrari]

19. Another little thing: no one asked her to amplify.

Isn't that strange? Here she's accusing this individual of truly horrible things and in the most general terms and neither her own attorney nor the presiding judge has a single question about her statements.

:shrug:

They asked me more questions about my husband when I had to appear at one of these hearings. You'd think the attorney would want to be more careful so her client would get her order and you'd think the court would be more careful given the status of the defendent. :shrug:

[suffragette]

3. They do pile up

and that pile stinks mightily.

[Raven]

4. NPR this morning (I think it was NPR) said that Ivin's family,

wife and children, were "detained" and that the FBI told them some very nasty things about him. This really smells.

[suffragette]

9. They really applied an inordinate amount of pressure to the whole family

Imagine having your spouse and children detained - DETAINED! - by the FBI, who then repeated hearsay to them. And for what purpose? Were they trying to get them to corroborate the hearsay?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93235339

Colleagues and friends of Ivins said he had become noticeably distressed at the FBI scrutiny. Jeff Adamovicz, who worked with Ivins at the Army's biodefense lab at Fort Detrick, Md., says Ivins was upset by the way investigators treated his family.

"Bruce told me that all of them had been detained at different locations, his children and his wife and then himself. And they were extensively questioned, and they told his wife and his children some disturbing things about their father being a murderer," Adamovicz said.

Add that someone you trusted as a therapy group session leader is now apparently working with the FBI and reporting anything you may have said in sessions to them.

This is smelling worse all the time.

[EFerrari]

10. That's not scrutiny, that's harrassment.

:shrug:

[suffragette]

14. Exactly

Intense pressure was put on him and his family. And pressure like that put on your family is even harder to bear than that just put on yourself.
I'm wondering if the FBI did similar to his colleagues and friends while constructing their case against him.

[Vanje]

7. K&R This stnks!

[Supersedeas]

11. why should the Media do any homework, when regurgitation of superficial Admin facts is so much

cheaper....bottom line journalism

[Mabus]

30. Oops

She says that he described a detailed plan to kill his co-workers because he was about to be indicted and he was going to go out in a blaze of glory. She's describing a session in early July.

In other words, according to Duley, Ivins knew he was going to be indicted before he was hospitalized but no one in the government told any of the victims of this update?


edited because I heard "January" not "July". :spank: Must not listen to both Thom Hartmann and this audio at the same time.

[Supersedeas]

31. once wonders when the FBI told Duley that Ivins was to be indicted?

[suffragette]

33. That's a great question

And would they be authorized to share that with her?

[suffragette]

32. You had me ready to go back to the audio

on that.

Isn't it interesting that so much of the audio is really "she says" but that there wasn't detailed questioning about that? And nowhere in it did I hear that she reported any of this to a supervisor. Instead, she specifies she went to the FBI agent she says was assigned to her. Odd, that.

[Mabus]

34. A question that keeps popping up for me is, what was Ivins working on?

Any chance that he was infected with something at work that would contribute to his erratic behavior?

[suffragette]

35. Great question

and one that really points again to the curious incuriosity of the press. Sounds like a question they should be asking.

[EFerrari]

36. How erratic was his behavior? Is there any other report

besides the incredible Duley's? :shrug:

My husband had me arrested and evaluated on his own psychotic report once when he was quietly paranoid. The police took me in to be on the safe side and a jail shrink had me out of there shortly after he interviewed me. It is possible to get people picked up on false or erroneous reports. It happens.

Ivins isn't here to tell his side of the story. We have to remember that.

[suffragette]

37. Another great question

What I would like is to see both of these paired in an article.

The 1st could be addressed through science and would undoubtedly bring to light all the safety and security precautions taken in the lab, of which I imagine there are many.

The 2nd would point to the crux of the matter, that much of what is being reported as fact is a string of unsubstantiated allegations from the audio tape of that hearing.

[Mabus]

43. Erratic enough that it was five months between behavior that warranted attention

And in the meantime his co-workers say that he was getting stressed out over the scrutiny. Who wouldn't get therapy.

[EFerrari]

46. If FBI was in my face 24/7, I'd start drinking too. Doubles. At breakfast.

You know, you don't have a 35 year career in research if you're that out of it. It just doesn't happen.

I'm pretty much convinced this man was innocent. Not that he didn't do government work but that he is innocent of any criminal activity.

And that feels terrible. If this could happen to him, who couldn't it happen to? All it took to neutralize him was getting some unqualified low level person to repeat talking points and the media went nuts. :shrug:

[Mabus]

38. Other stuff that doesn't jive, who committed him?

From a WaPo article

Still, by spring, Ivins's life seemed to be falling apart. Police were first called to his house on March 19, when he was discovered unconscious and briefly admitted to a hospital. On July 10, they encountered Ivins again, this time after a counselor called from Fort Detrick to report that the scientist was a danger to himself, and was ranting about weapons and making death threats. He went peacefully with police to Frederick Memorial Hospital, where he was admitted to a psychiatric ward.


He was later released voluntarily, but his erratic behavior prompted his therapist, Jean C. Duley, to seek a protective order. Duley wrote that Ivins "has a history dating to his graduate days of homicidal threats, actions, plans, threats & actions toward therapists." She quoted his psychiatrist, Dr. David Irwin, as calling him "homicidal, sociopathic, with clear intentions." Irwin could not be reached for comment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080102326_3.html?sid=ST2008080101023&pos=

Okay first, Ivins is "a danger to himself, and was ranting about weapons and making death threats." But Duley describes him as having ". . . a history dating to his graduate days of homicidal threats, actions, plans, threats & actions toward therapists."

Also, she says she notified the police and got him committed but according to WaPo it was a counselor from Fort Detrick. I've seen her called the Program Director at Comprehensive Counseling Associates. Was this at Ft. Detrick? I also see at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax1.html and she says that he was ranting on July 9th but Ivins wasn't committed until July 10. According to the above WaPo account, the counselor at Fort Detrick called the police and Ivins "went peacefully with police to Frederick Memorial Hospital, where he was admitted to a psychiatric ward."

[EFerrari]

39. You are right. Neither she nor that program director

could hospitalize him because they aren't MDs. They could, however, notify the police and the cops could take him to the hospital and a doc there would have to sign him in. The restraining order would be the piece of evidence that greased the wheels.

And Duley seems to be repeating what she's been told. Have you listened to the audio? She makes general statements in cliches and says "um" every other syllable. Nothing concrete -- in the way you'd remember something that really frightened you.

My guess is that after the hearing, she took her paperwork back to the clinic and had her boss call the cops. Her boss knows the FBI is involved and moves the whole fiasco forward.

Eta: Wait -- I have the timeline wrong. That hearing happened after he was picked up.

Scratch that. Duley would only have to report a threat to her boss, and if it was credible enough, her boss would be obligated to call the police.

[suffragette]

40. Hmm, March 19th would be 5 months from July

Duley said she'd know him 6 months, not five, but now I'm wondering if the March 19th incident might be what led him to the counseling center.

sfexpat has also pointed out that the question of who committed him is a big gaping hole in this story. And it's yet another area where there are questions that aren't being answered or even asked in the media. That part is just left vague.

[EFerrari]

42. And why did the PD go to the house on March 19?

If it was a 911 call for an ambulance, police routinely accompany the ambulance. Saying it was just "police" implies that he did something wrong or illegal, doesn't it?

Maybe he drank too much and took a fall or a host of other scenarios that have nothing to do with being criminal or even "crazy" but that happen to people every day. This whole story is being spun to make him look like a criminal.

[Mabus]

56. How long was he hospitalized for the March 19th event?

If he was found unconscious and they took him to the hospital, how long was he in? Overnight? A few days? A week? Was the place where Duley worked one of the treatment centers that the hospital usually recommends? Or is it a place that they send government employees because of the insurance? I mean, doesn't someone who is working in a sensitive area and have certain types of clearances have to be careful from whom they seek treatment? Maybe I've watched too many episodes of the Sopranos. :shrug:

Then there's the question of how quickly he would have got into see someone for an initial evaluation. How did he find the treatment center and how soon after the March incident did he get in to see a therapist? Did he start with the group therapy or was it recommended by a private therapist?

Which brings me to the counselor at Ft. Detrick who is mentioned in some articles and ties in with the questions above. I'm assuming since there is apparently a counselor at Ft. Detrick that Ivins would have to check in with them after his hospitalization. Did this counselor refer Ivins to the place where Duley worked? And when I say "recommend" I mean direct him to get treatment there. And how often was Ivins getting treatment? How much, if any, communication was there between the various entities treating him? Did the hospital patch him up, tell him that should look into treatment and send him off? Or did the hospital's staff have a psychological evaluation and recommend a course of treatment and places to seek treatment?

Perhaps I'm over thinking this but it seems like Duley's timetable is even shorter. I just know that one of my stepdaughters tried to commit suicide a number of years ago. She swallowed a bunch of pills and spent several days recovering after getting her stomach pumped. The hospital wouldn't release her until she had a psych eval. They had to wait until the drugs were out of her system. In the meantime they monitored her for brain damage, among other things. After we got the psych eval the hospital recommended further hospitalization in the children's psych ward. We got recommendations and arranged treatment with a local counseling center that the insurance would cover and that the hospital recommended. Then we had to find a therapist that was available. It took a while for her to get out of the hospital and into treatment. It wasn't an overnight thing.

An alternative explanation is that he was already under Duley's and/or the treatment center's care at the time of the March incident.

So, am I over thinking this, or what?

[EFerrari]

59. From reading his email to his confidante, I put it together this way.

He was already seeing a doctor for psych meds and a counselor.

So, perhaps, he has this incident and is taken to the hospital.

He explains it as accidental and due to overdrinking over stress so someone -- either hospital doc or his counselor refer him to Duley's group for substance abuse. He probably sounds better than he is -- smart, reasonable, embarrassed, self deprecating with his characteristic sense of humor. So, the incident is closed and off he goes back to work and starts the group. He's not in the hospital for more than 24 hours if that long.

And everybody feels okay about this because, he is already seeing a psychiatrist and a counselor and his insight seems fine. And because he isn't the insane cartoon of Duley's testimony.

[Mabus]

60. But, if you go along with what they are claiming

why is no one mentioning the class action lawsuit that was filed on March 18th against Rumsfeld and the DoD? Wouldn't that explain why Ivins was found by his wife on the afternoon of March 19th? They're looking for motives why not mention this one? Or do they not want to talk about what was going on in March, 2003 because it would revisit the media's failure to report in the run up to the actual invasion?

I also wonder about the e-mail that Ivins allegedly sent that insisted bin Laden had both anthrax and sarin gas.

Ivins sent an email … a few days before the anthrax attacks warning that "Bin Laden terrorists for sure have anthrax and sarin gas" and have "just decreed death to all Jews and all Americans," language similar to the anthrax letters warning "WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX . . . DEATH TO AMERICA . . . DEATH TO ISRAEL."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93364738

Is sarin gas something we should be watching for? And what about the rhetoric that is so distinctive as to say they are from the same source? Frankly, it sounds a lot like what the RW radio people were saying.

[EFerrari]

61. There is no way the Bush Justice Department will bring up

Rumsfeld's profiteering via the class action suit, right? The sense I get is that Ivins was under pressure to fix the vaccine but not immediately under pressure from the cabal. For example, when he goes to pick up his award in D.C., he talks about how it's the first time he's ever been to that city. He was also a prolific writer. As DearAbby points out on another thread, he wrote about everything. If he'd had more direct communication with any of those people, it would be in his letters or emails somewhere in some form, imo.

His relapse (or whatever it was) seems to precede the events of that Fall and it may be that 3/19 would have happened for him regardless just as a consequence of his job.

As far as the language in that email, I was surprised that FBI brought it up because so many people were saying exactly the same thing. There's nothing remarkable about it. It wasn't only RW radio, either. Greenwald has a list of mainstream media outlets that used the same kind of language.

[Mabus]

69. He went to two treatment facilities before the July group therapy

A friend and fellow member of a 12-step program for alcoholics who spent hours counseling him said Ivins, who at least in recent years had not been a drinker, went rapidly downhill after the FBI searched his house and questioned his wife and children last November.

The friend, a fellow scientist who spoke on the condition that he not be named, said Ivins had repeatedly denied sending the anthrax letters and was particularly upset at what he considered to be the FBI's aggressive questioning of his children, Andrew and Amanda, both 24, as investigators tried to get them to turn on their father.

"He said, 'I'm innocent of these charges,' " the friend said. "He was absolutely shocked they were going after him like this." Through much of the year, the friend said, Ivins was drinking large amounts of vodka, combined with Ambien and prescription tranquilizers. After being found unconscious in his home in March, he spent four weeks in a treatment program at Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland After that he spent another four weeks in treatment at the Thomas Finan Center in Cumberland, Maryland, being released to go home to Frederick in late May.

http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=15048909

[EFerrari]

73. Thanks! So, perhaps that local group was like follow up

or, as ongoing support.

So, he was released in May and FBI decides this is a good time to sandbag him because he's vulnerable.

[Mabus]

75. Which means that either Duley knew him from before he sought treatment at her clinic

or he was seeking treatment at her clinic contemporaneous to other treatment (which might be difficult since at least one of those is an in-patient facility) and it isn't included or Duley is wrong about how long she was actually acquainted with him when she swore under oath at the RO hearing.

[suffragette]

67. I thin sfexpat is on target in her response

Something I've been thinking about more is how some reports specified Ivins was taking Ambien along with drinking and with other prescription tranquilizers.


Two thoughts about the Ambien after looking it up and verifying the following info at http://www.drugs.com/ambien.html
I bolded areas of concern.

1) Before taking this medication, tell your doctor if you are allergic to any drugs, or if you have:
kidney disease;
liver disease;
lung disease such as asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD);
a history of depression, mental illness, or suicidal thoughts; or
a history of drug or alcohol addiction.
If you have any of these conditions, you may not be able to use Ambien, or you may need a dosage adjustment or special tests during treatment.

So, if he has these problems, why was Ambien prescribed? Was there any monitoring?


2) Ambien side effects

Ambien may cause a severe allergic reaction. Stop taking Ambien and get emergency medical help if you have any of these signs of an allergic reaction: hives; difficulty breathing; swelling of your face, lips, tongue, or throat.

Stop using Ambien and call your doctor at once if you have any of these serious side effects:
worsening sleep problems;
depressed mood, thoughts of hurting yourself;
unusual thoughts, risk-taking behavior, decreased inhibitions, no fear of danger;
aggression, feeling agitated;
hallucinations, confusion, loss of personality.

Less serious Ambien side effects may include:
daytime drowsiness, dizziness, weakness, feeling "drugged" or light-headed;
lack of coordination;
amnesia, forgetfulness;
vivid or abnormal dreams;
diarrhea, nausea, vomiting;
headache, muscle pain; or
blurred vision.

How long was he taking Ambien? Is it at all connected to his purported behavior? Was he still taking it in July?

And with Ambien and tranquilizers at hand (if he still had them), why Tylenol?

edited for formatting

[Mabus]

68. Interesting piece of the puzzle

and it would help explain a lot. I wonder what other drug(s) he was on.

Also, wasn't part of the reason he was taking the drugs because he felt stressed out by the FBI's investigation? I feel like a tiger chasing its tail. The FBI puts the heat on him so he seeks treatment. The treatment makes him more unstable and he finally snaps.

[EFerrari]

41. You know what I'd like to know -- when did the FBI start working on Duley?

Did she immediately become a partner or did they have to buy her a hamburger lunch?

Some day we're going to find out she has a personality disorder that made her 1) very easy to manipulate by agents who make her feel validated or important to them, and 2) very good at manipulating other people by the force of her personality.

[suffragette]

44. And did they work on other people in the clinic who resisted

or just look up her record and go right after her?

I find the absolute quiet from everyone else at that clinic to be very suspicious - rather like the dog who didn't bark. Wouldn't they have some comment on the group session or their concern for Duley's safety if they thought Ivins said the things she claimed?

[EFerrari]

45. Exactly. Where are her supervisors? Where are the monitoring doctors?

Are they lawyering up because they've f#cked up bigtime? Betcha they are. They took her word and FBI's word and helped destroy this man.

FBI is supposed to meet with the families tomorrow. Sometime after that, there is a report that they will attempt to "close" this case. I hope no one allows that to happen. :grr:

[suffragette]

47. Looks like the FBI has been pressured to release "evidence"

I posted it here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3425012

I wonder how much massaging it will take to make the allegations resemble something approaching evidence.

I looked up info on the clinic at one point and saw they list psychologist and at least one psychiatrist, Dr. Levy. Then searched in google news and not one item mentioning him. Maybe he is lawyered up or just staying far away from commenting on something he has doubts about.

[EFerrari]

48. Whoever is the major financial interest in that operation

will probably now let Duley hang out to dry. It will be interesting to see if Dr. Ivins' family manages to get an advocate to push on these discrepancies and who they might choose.

[suffragette]

49. I hope they get an advocate

though with all the threats and intimidation they've faced, they may just be afraid and want it to go away.

[EFerrari]

51. My heart hurts for that family.

They just had the whole weight of Bush/Cheney fall on their heads -- after years of harrassment.

[suffragette]

53. As does mine

And all this while mourning for a husband and father. It must be unbearable.

[robertpaulsen]

50. Just want to congratulate you on a fantastic thread.

Not only is it in my DU bookmarks, but I linked it to my blog. :yourock:

[suffragette]

52. Wow, thanks

Wish I had chosen a clearer title for it.

Without sfexpat's responses and help in going to the audio and pointing out inconsistencies and salient points, this thread would have vanished quickly.

If you haven't already, do go listen to it. It really needs to be examined and picked apart. Just wish I could find a full transcript of it somewhere.

[EFerrari]

54. You nailed it precisely in your subject line: the media took Duley's report

and ran with it -- with no confirming evidence from any credible source and before it vetted her.

We're in big trouble when someone like Duley can cause such a reaction.

[suffragette]

55. And most of the media aren't specifying that as the source

and are paraphrasing and leaving pertinent info out.

We are in big trouble when this is the process.

[Mabus]

57. The other thing that kind of bothers me is that Ivins got an award

Strap on your tinfoil hat.

Here's what bothers me. This administration likes to give out medals to those who have participated in this fiasco. Tenent got a medal, Condi got a medal, Ivins got a medal. Ivins got a medal granted by the Army on March 14, 2003. We went to war, thanks in large part to Powell's anthrax demonstration, less than a week later on March 20.

Ivins got the award one week after Hans Blix said the following at the UN:

The legality of the Al Fatah missile is still under review, pending further investigation and measurement of various parameters of that missile.

More papers on anthrax, VX and missiles have recently been provided. Many have been found to restate what Iraq already has declared, and some will require further study and discussion.

There is a significant Iraqi effort under way to clarify a major source of uncertainty as to the quantities of biological and chemical weapons which were unilaterally destroyed in 1991. A part of this effort concerns a disposal site, which was deemed too dangerous for full investigation in the past. It is now being re-excavated.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/07/sprj.irq.un.transcript.blix/index.html

Did you catch that? The UN was excavating for biological weapons. What would have happened to the RW spin and Colin Powell's "a teaspoon of anthrax" shut down Congress speech if the UN were actually able to find what kind of anthrax Iraq had? What if the UN found that there was no way that Iraq had anthrax? I mean, what if the UN found what was left, tested it against the September 2001 anthrax and/or made an issue that brought it back to the front pages - right at the time that Bush was reading to hit the "go" button - that Iraq wasn't responsible for either the Towers being hit or the anthrax letters.

So Blix testifies that they are re-excavating the remnants of the biological spot, that they didn't before because it was too dangerous in the past, i.e. it was no longer dangerous in March, 2003.

I'll even go out the limb far enough to say, what if our government contemplated planting anthrax in Iraq? For one thing, they couldn't have the other strain excavated. It would eventually be proven to be different. Maybe this is one reason why they never found anthrax there. It would have been easy enough to plant it and give some Iraqis enough money to say, "yep, that's ours" but they couldn't because they didn't know if the UN actually had any samples.

Okay, Ivins was awarded a Decoration for Exceptional Civilian Service award on March 14, 2003. I'm assuming that the powers that be didn't just wake up on the morning of March 14 and say to themselves, "I'll hand out an award today." The award had been planned for a while and I can't imagine, because it is the highest award for a civilian, that it is given out very often.

Decoration for Exceptional Civilian Service is the highest award granted by the United States Secretary of the Army to Army civilian personnel. It consists of a medal, lapel button, and citation certificate. With the exception of nominations for bravery, nominees must have established a demonstrable pattern of excellence and achievement which normally have been recognized by previous awards up to and including the Meritorious Civilian Service Award.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoration_for_Exceptional_Civilian_Service

Then, on March 18 Bush told Saddam and his kids to haul their asses out of Iraq within 48 hours. This prompted the UN to issue evacuation orders for its people. You know, those inspectors that the RW tell us left because Saddam made them :eyes:.

Then, on March 19, the day after Bush issues his ultimatum and the troops are being deployed, the police are called to Ivins house. Okay, I just don't like this administration. I also admit that I'm not above pulling out my tinfoil hat from time to time.

[EFerrari]

58. Iirc, the award was for fixing the anthrax vaccine.

ETA: It would be interesting to see who recommended him for the award, no?

[Mabus]

62. Have you looked at the patent history?

There is a comment on patently-o's blog that is interesting.

At the risk of going off-topic, has everyone noticed the interesting patent-related news? Specifically, USPN 6,316,006, filed November 23, 1994 and issued November 13, 2001? And USPN 6,387,665 filed March 7, 2000 and issued May 14, 2002?

***

The interesting thing about the anthrax patent, of course, is the timing.

http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4gPMATJgFieAfqRqCLGpugijnABX4_83FT9IKBEpDlQxNDCRz8qJzU9MblSP1jfWz9AvyA3NDSi3NsRAHxEBJg!/delta/base64xml/L0lJSk03dWlDU1lKSi9vQXd3QUFNWWdBQ0VJUWhDRUVJaEZLQSEvNEZHZ2RZbktKMEZSb1hmckNIZGgvN18wXzE4TC8yOS9zYS5nZXRCaWI!#7_0_18L

A notice of allowance was sent February 19 1998. Then there appears to have been some confusion. A second Notice of Allowance was mailed Oct 16, 1998. Then the application was abandoned. A petition was filed in June of 2000, docketed to an Examiner, and then basically noting happens until ...

... Sept 11, 2001. Six weeks after the terrorist attacks (Oct. 15, 2001) PAIR contains an entry stating "Application Is Considered Ready for Issue". The anthrax-containing letters were mailed out during a period starting one week AFTER 9-11 and continuing through October.

What are the odds that if the PTO's phone records are checked that they will not reveal a call to the Examiner about the status of this case?

http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2008/08/end-of-an-era-e.html#comment-125095536

In other words the initial patent for the vaccine was filed back in 1994, there was a petition to revive the application received on March 10, 2000 that was granted in June, 2000. So, a patent is filed in 1994, prosecuted and then dropped only to be revived in 2000.

Here's the app's history I pulled from the USPTO's Public PAIR system (http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4gPMATJgFieAfqRqCLGpugijnABX4_83FT9IKBEpDlQxNDCRz8qJzU9MblSP1jfWz9AvyA3NDSi3NsRAHxEBJg!/delta/base64xml/L0lJSk03dWlDU1lKSi9vQXd3QUFNWWdBQ0VJUWhDRUVJaEZLQSEvNEZHZ2RZbktKMEZSb1hmckNIZGgvN18wXzE4TC81MC9zYS5nZXRCaWI!#7_0_18L you may have to log in the system and enter the patent number (aka Publication Number).

07-06-2004 Correspondence Address Change
04-23-2004 Correspondence Address Change
05-30-2001 Workflow - File Sent to Contractor
11-13-2001 Recordation of Patent Grant Mailed
10-25-2001 Issue Notification Mailed
11-13-2001 Patent Issue Date Used in PTA Calculation
10-15-2001 Application Is Considered Ready for Issue
03-10-2000 Issue Fee Payment Verified
06-21-2000 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
06-07-2000 Mail-Petition to Revive Application - Granted
03-10-2000 Petition Entered
02-22-1999 Mail Notice of Abandonment from Publications
02-22-1999 Abandonment for Failure to Pay Issue Fee
02-22-1999 Abandonment for Failure to Pay Issue Fee
10-16-1998 Mail Notice of Allowance
10-16-1998 Notice of Allowance Data Verification Completed
09-22-1998 Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL - 413)
09-09-1998 Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL - 413)
08-26-1998 Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL - 413)
08-25-1998 Date Forwarded to Examiner
05-22-1998 Continuing Prosecution Application - Continuation (ACPA)
05-10-2000 Correspondence Address Change
05-01-1998 Change in Power of Attorney (May Include Associate POA)
02-19-1998 Mail Notice of Allowance
02-19-1998 Notice of Allowance Data Verification Completed
01-20-1998 Affidavit(s) (Rule 131 or 132) or Exhibit(s) Received
01-20-1998 Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL - 413)
09-17-1997 Mail Final Rejection (PTOL - 326)
09-15-1997 Final Rejection
06-09-1997 Affidavit(s) (Rule 131 or 132) or Exhibit(s) Received
07-03-1997 Date Forwarded to Examiner
06-09-1997 Response after Non-Final Action
06-09-1997 Request for Extension of Time - Granted
02-10-1997 Mail Non-Final Rejection
02-03-1997 Non-Final Rejection
01-23-1997 Examiner Interview Summary Record (PTOL - 413)
08-23-1996 Correspondence Address Change
08-23-1996 Correspondence Address Change
09-20-1996 Case Docketed to Examiner in GAU
08-21-1996 Application Captured on Microfilm
08-15-1996 Application Is Now Complete
12-20-1994 Notice Mailed--Application Incomplete--Filing Date Assigned

Petitioning to revive a patent application requires some paperwork and it is usually handled by the attorneys for the assignee, as these inventors have assigned their rights over to the government and have agreed to let the government be in charge of the process.

[EFerrari]

63. March 2000: Clinton Attempt to Fight Terrorism Financing Defeated by Republican

March 2000: Clinton Attempt to Fight Terrorism Financing Defeated by Republican
Edit event

The Clinton administration begins a push to fight terrorism financing by introducing a tough anti-money laundering bill. The bill faces tough opposition, mostly from Republicans and lobbyists who enjoy the anonymity of offshore banking, which would be affected by the legislation. Despite passing the House Banking Committee by a vote of 31 to 1 in July 2000, Senator Phil Gramm (R) refuses to let the bill come up for a vote in his Senate Banking Committee. Other efforts begun at this time to fight terrorism financing are later stymied by the new Bush administration in February 2001.

(from the historycommons)

[EFerrari]

65. Have you seen this Salon article on Assaad?

Fort Detrick's anthrax mystery

Who tried to frame Dr. Ayaad Assaad, a former biowarfare researcher at the Army lab? Was it the same person responsible for last fall's anthrax mail terrorism?

By Laura Rozen

http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2002/01/26/assaad/index1.html

[Mabus]

71. According to this March 2008 article, the FBI had four suspects

here's an article from March.

FBI Focusing on 'About Four' Suspects in 2001 Anthrax Attacks
Friday, March 28, 2008

By Catherine Herridge and Ian McCaleb

WASHINGTON — The FBI has narrowed its focus to "about four" suspects in the 6 1/2-year investigation of the deadly anthrax attacks of 2001, and at least three of those suspects are linked to the Army’s bioweapons research facility at Fort Detrick in Maryland, FOX News has learned.

Among the pool of suspects are three scientists — a former deputy commander, a leading anthrax scientist and a microbiologist — linked to the research facility, known as USAMRIID.

***

In December 2001, an Army commander tried to dispel the possibility of a connection to Fort Detrick by taking the media on a rare tour of the base. The commander said the Army used only liquid anthrax, not powder, for its experiments.

***

But in an e-mail obtained by FOX News, scientists at Fort Detrick openly discussed how the anthrax powder they were asked to analyze after the attacks was nearly identical to that made by one of their colleagues.

"Then he said he had to look at a lot of samples that the FBI had prepared ... to duplicate the letter material," the e-mail reads. "Then the bombshell. He said that the best duplication of the material was the stuff made by (name redacted). He said that it was almost exactly the same … his knees got shaky and he sputtered, 'But I told the General we didn't make spore powder!'"


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,342852,00.html

Who gave Fox news these e-mails? Why aren't they in the FBI's document dump?

[suffragette]

64. Meryl Nass makes important points about the patent

and vaccine motive allegations.
http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/

Sourcing
Back in 2002, in preparation for an interview on the anthrax letters for "Unsolved Mysteries," I reviewed the media coverage. As I read article after article, I found that the statements most germane to an understanding of the case were almost entirely unsourced. It was unnerving to conclude that I knew very little about the letters, as so little of the reported "evidence" was derived from people willing to go on the record.

The same appears to be happening in current reporting on Bruce Ivins. Though I deeply respect LA Times reporter David Willman, who has twice won a Pulitzer, his breaking stories on Bruce Ivins are almost entirely unsourced. Did Ivins really stand to gain financially from his anthrax vaccine patents? Historically, government employees do not receive these royalties: the government does. If this modest bench scientist had a financial motive (plus access to weaponized anthrax, plus ability to mail letters from New Jersey and other places such as the UK) it is critical to the case, and the evidence needs to be unimpeachable.

Lest we forget: this case has had 3 false leads, who were probably deliberately set up, before Bruce Ivins: Hatfill, Assaad, and the ex-Detrick scientists who harrassed Assaad.
Posted by Meryl Nass, M.D. at 9:02 AM 1 comments
Friday, August 1, 2008
He did it to test his vaccine????
The anthrax letters did not test anyone's vaccine. For people exposed to the anthrax letters, anthrax vaccine was given in three doses over 4 weeks. It takes about 4-6 weeks after vaccinations start before recipients develop levels of antibodies to anthrax that may be protective.

The vaccine's label even points out that anthrax vaccine is NOT a treatment for anthrax and does not provide protection for acute exposures. You need to take antibiotics while waiting for vaccine protection to develop...and because vaccine protection is variable, and depends on each person's ability to mount a protective immune response, antibiotics are a much more reliable protection, even after 2-3 doses of vaccine have been administered and 4-6 weeks have gone by.

So no scientist would send anthrax letters to "test a vaccine." It's a ridiculous theory.

Did the person who fed this idea to the media (in a desperate attempt to create a motive that could implicate Bruce Ivins) have anything to do with the anthrax letters? Or perhaps work for the Justice Department?

I want to know these sources. I am really wondering if they are the same sources ABC had.

[Mabus]

66. Thank you!

I heard on NPR this afternoon that they are ditching the anthrax patent story in favor of Ivins targeting people based on an article about abortion found in his home. Now Ivins did it because he was an anti-abortionist.

[EFerrari]

72. How do you test a vaccine that no one has taken, anyway?

That doesn't even make sense.

[TexasObserver]

70. Her basis is HEARSAY provided by the FBI.

They went in, gave her the treatment, fed her the "facts" they wanted her to believe, and she lapped it up with no critical review whatsoever. She's got a head full of oatmeal, and they used her.

[EFerrari]

74. This is OT for this thread but I don't want to start yet another one.

Isn't there a huge or pretty big biotech industry in New Jersey? I found two labs within five miles of that mailbox.

It makes no sense to drive two hundred miles to mail anthrax that can go right through the envelope. :shrug:

[Mabus]

76. Found this

The FBI also believes that the sender is someone who works in a research lab for a university, a drug company, or a biotech company. The Greenbrook School is only a couple of miles away from US Route 1 which is a lined with drug and biotech companies such as Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, and Princeton Biomeditech Corporation. Bio-Link, a trade association for the biotech industry, lists on their Web site more than 100 biotech companies in New Jersey. Most of the companies are within 25 miles on the Greenbrook School. Four companies, for example, are located in the 08852 Zip code.
(source: http://www.computerbytesman.com/anthrax/retaddr.htm)

Here's the link to Bio-link's page: http://www.bio-link.org/centersNJ.htm

As for driving so far, they said it was something that he did. I don't know how long (weeks, months, days) that he had been doing it or if it started around the time he was taking Ambien or other meds.

[EFerrari]

78. I just scanned a story that says there is a gap on his time card

on the 9/17. He worked late the night before and then took off early, after a little more than two hours. I'm having trouble finding it again. Here's the CNN version:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/08/anthrax.probe/index.html?eref=rss_crime

[Mabus]

81. I think this is the document you're looking for

http://www.usdoj.gov/amerithrax/07-524-M-01%20attachment.pdf Warning. PDF. Discussion about his lab time around the mailing of the letter to Brokaw begins on the bottom of page 8.

[EFerrari]

83. P. 8 says window of opportunity: 5pm Monday - Noon, Tuesday.

How could he mail that letter and be back for an appointment at 4pm on Monday if the window didn't start until an hour later? :shrug:

ETA: Yikes. The CNN story has been changed from "4pm" (or maybe, 4:30pm) to "late afternoon appointment".

[suffragette]

84. They CHANGED the time?

So now they're changing the facts they already printed to fit the story?

[EFerrari]

86. Yes. I don't remember the minutes but it was "4:XXpm according to

a source that prefers to remain anonymous". Now it just reads "a late afternoon appointment".

ETA: It matters because the FBI says on P. 8 of the pdf that the window of opportunity for the mailing was between 5pm that night to noon the following day (9/18).

So, if he was back in time for a 4:XXpm appointment, he couldn't have been there between the times THE FBI ITSELF says was the window of opportunity. :shrug:

[Mabus]

85. There are so many things that still don't add up

I'm going to end up printing some of this stuff out and going over it. Right now I need to go pick up hubby from the Metro.

[suffragette]

87. Mabus, check out sfexpat's thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3754666&mesg_id=3754666

She just caught something VERY important!

[suffragette]

79. Good point

I don't have time until later to post much, but applaud the research you and Mabus are doing today.

[EFerrari]

77. This is an article about a woman in Oregon that says Ivins stalked her.

Director of Oregon's primate lab says she was stalked by anthrax suspect
Nancy Haigwood says she was stalked by Bruce Ivins, the FBI's suspect in the 2001 deaths
Friday, August 08, 2008
ANDY DWORKIN
The Oregonian Staff

When microbiologists were asked in 2002 to consider whether one of their peers had mailed anthrax spores nationwide, the current director of the Oregon National Primate Research Center was quick to call the FBI.

In September 2001, a government scientist -- who Nancy Haigwood, director of the Hillsboro center, says stalked her for decades -- sent Haigwood and other acquaintances a photo of himself working with anthrax at the U.S. Army's Fort Detrick research center.

The scientist, Bruce Ivins, 62, killed himself last month as the FBI was building a case that he sent anthrax-tainted letters that killed five people in 2001.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1218165908122730.xml&coll=7

[suffragette]

80. Looks like this is the source of the sorority obsession allegations

and some of the emails the FBI has specified.
So, much of what they made sound like separate incidents seems to stem from here.

[EFerrari]

82. Yes. And, that spray painting incident happened over 25 years ago.

Even if he did it and if it was "vandalism" and not a prank. Gosh, I toilet papered my boyfriend's house in 1971 with one of my cousins. If they pick me up, tell them it was in the context of an ongoing Summer waterballoon fight. :crazy: