Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FBI concludes: Yup, Bruce Ivings sent the Amthrax letters

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ohiodemocratic Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 03:10 PM
Original message
FBI concludes: Yup, Bruce Ivings sent the Amthrax letters
Edited on Fri Feb-19-10 03:14 PM by ohiodemocratic
Even though at one point they blamed someone else for the attacks.
Ivins committed "suicide" before charges were pressed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/us/20anthrax.html?hp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. and blamed that other guy before Ivings
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. And get this: Fractured Bureaucracy Inc accounted minute by minute
Edited on Fri Feb-19-10 04:08 PM by EFerrari
for Hatfil's movements but they had Ivins in Princeton mailing anthrax at 5pm AND in Frederick at an appointment at the same time.

This is insulting on top of being dangerous.

Seriously, this is the limit. They have nothing on Ivins except that they drove him to suicide and silenced his co-workers' objections. Bastards.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. Unbelievable how the worst terrorist attack in US history has been blown off
It boggles
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #2
22. Meanwhile, Bush and Cheney are free. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
3. Looks like they've got a pretty tight case.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
17. Partial admission, connected directly to the weapon...
doesn't get much better than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. conveeeeeeenient
easy to blame the dead guy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I seem to recall that being a constant in Totalitarian nations
even fancy, plausibly deniable Inverted Totalitarianisms like we live under.

"The corpse did it."

Sure it did, may we ask it a few questions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
7. The FBI has crap against Ivins and no scientist that doesn't work for them
Edited on Fri Feb-19-10 05:01 PM by EFerrari
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. um there is no link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Fixed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
26. +1
Reminder of issues with this:

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/dubo...


And, although an FBI spokesperson slammed this recent article, she didn't provide any specifics to dispute it:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704541004...

Key from that is that a scientific study contracted by the FBI (but done by scientists who don't work for them) that proved the opposite of what the FBI alleged:


The answer came seven months later on April 17, 2009. According to the FBI lab, 1.4% of the powder in the Leahy letter was silicon. "This is a shockingly high proportion," explained Stuart Jacobson, an expert in small particle chemistry. "It is a number one would expect from the deliberate weaponization of anthrax, but not from any conceivable accidental contamination."

Nevertheless, in an attempt to back up its theory, the FBI contracted scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Labs in California to conduct experiments in which anthrax is accidently absorbed from a media heavily laced with silicon. When the results were revealed to the National Academy Of Science in September 2009, they effectively blew the FBI's theory out of the water.

The Livermore scientists had tried 56 times to replicate the high silicon content without any success. Even though they added increasingly high amounts of silicon to the media, they never even came close to the 1.4% in the attack anthrax. Most results were an order of magnitude lower, with some as low as .001%.

What these tests inadvertently demonstrated is that the anthrax spores could not have been accidently contaminated by the nutrients in the media. "If there is that much silicon, it had to have been added," Jeffrey Adamovicz, who supervised Ivins's work at Fort Detrick, wrote to me last month. He added that the silicon in the attack anthrax could have been added via a large fermentorwhich Battelle and other labs use" but "we did not use a fermentor to grow anthrax at USAMRIID . . . We did not have the capability to add silicon compounds to anthrax spores."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. Mueller sat there and promised Senator Leahy in an open hearing
that the study would prove their case. He couldn't have been more confident and more full of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Mueller - putting the "con" in confident
Leahy openly challenged him in that hearing.
I wonder what Leahy thinks of this closing without closure.


http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/17/robert-mue... /

(Leahy interrupts Mueller just as hes pitching his great anthrax investigation.)

Leahy: Ive thought about throughout this time. You briefed me in Vermont. These weapons that were used against the American people and Congressare you aware of any facility in the US that is capable of making the anthrax besides Dugway in UT and Batelle in OH? Other than those two?

Mueller: Fifteen in the US and 2 overseas.

Leahy: Are there any other facilities capable of making this anthrax?

Mueller: I do believe there are. I would have to get back to you.

Leahy: At some point were going to take a break and please get me that information, because I know of no others besides those two. Im aware of the article from September 4 reporting a program of secret research on biological weapons, project has been embraced by Bush Administration. Weapons used against Americans were right after that.

~~~

Leahy: If Ivins is the one who sent the letter, I do not believe in any manner that he is the only person involved in this attack on Congress and the American people. I believe there are other people involved either as accessories before or after. I believe there are others out there who could be charged with murder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. If I had any confidence that a letter would even be read
I'd write to Senator Leahy. You'd think he of all people would want to pursue this. He's brilliant, he's been around and his office got one of those letters. But, if he doesn't, I don't see who will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. I know. I feel the same way.
I haven't seen a statement by him yet. Maybe we'll see one Monday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. I posted Meryl's response below and have asked her if I can distribute it.
This is insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
10. Convicted without a trial. Nice. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. With this DOJ that's the only way to get a conviction.
They spend their time making up excuses for not bringing people to trial.

(Just got off the phone with my mother: "Kerik? What did he do? Was he a torturer? What's he going to jail for? None of the rest of them are going to jail."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Can we resurrect him for a trial?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Has anyone ever been tried in absentia? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #21
31. I think in order to be tried that way, you have to be alive, somewhere.
FBI hit the jackpot. They destabilized a fragile man and now they can do what they want with his memory. Assholes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
11. So who sent the anthrax in the letter to the elderly lady
in one of the upper New England States. That has never ever been mentioned.
And it seems to me since all targeted were liberal news and liberal politicans it was republican orientated. NO ONE WILL TELL ME DIFFERENT.

But I still can't figure out anything about the old lady has anyone heard why she got one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. The lady was from Oxford, CT. On my local news here in New Haven,
they said Ivings was the one who sent her the anthrax. I didn't hear them tell us why and I wonder that as well. She just seemed like a nice lady...no political stuff...if anything she was a kind of nice "church lady" type. It was sad when it happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. IIRC, she wasn't sent an anthrax letter. An innocent letter to her
went through one of the contaminated post offices and was contaminated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Ok, great, thanks for that. I didn't know it so it's good you posted it..
I guess my ABC affiliate didn't have that info.

Thanks. I appreciate that....!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #16
24. Never have seen any followup about who they think may have been targeted
from a mailing sent through that postal center.

All the other mailings were sent to someone - as Bitwit noted, specific Democratic politicians and (perceived as) liberal news media - and those mailings contaminated postal equipment because of the nature of the anthrax. So who was that letter or letters in Connecticut intended for?

Follow the motive, find the true criminals. But the FBI clearly has no intention of doing that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #14
38. I have been there a few times, to Oxford.
I heard about this on the news too, on Channel 8. I wonder why she would be a target? She did not seem political at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. Robert Mueller is a longtime legal 'fixer' for BushInc. He's acting exactly as I expect as FBI head.
,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrary1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
20. Please excuse my skepticism regarding their findings.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-19-10 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
23. k&r n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:39 AM
Response to Original message
25. Thanks ohiodemocratic k/r n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 03:54 AM
Response to Original message
27. A 12 year old can see what a put-up this is.
Now let's see how many 'DUers' chime in to defend this.

Move along, nothing to see here...
:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Did you read the article? Scott Shane should be ashamed of himself
for writing such innuendo-filled tripe. And the kicker is, he used to be one of the best reporters on this story. But at some point shortly after Bruce Ivins died, Shane started regurgitating FBI talking points.

This "obsession" with two women turns out to be crap. The remarks he made about himself refer to his efforts to stop self-medicating when he relapsed. It's crap, all of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
32. Cui bono?
There's your perps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
35. Here is Dr. Meryl Nass's excellent rebuttal to the NYT's FBI stenography:
Friday, February 19, 2010
FBI: CASE CLOSED (and Ivins did it)

But FBI's report was released on Friday afternoon... which means the FBI anticipated doubt and ridicule. And the National Academy of Science (NAS) is several months away from issuing its report on the microbial forensics, suggesting a) asking NAS to investigate the FBI's science was just a charade to placate Congress, and/or b) NAS' investigation might be uncovering things the FBI would prefer to bury, so FBI decided to preempt the NAS panel's report.

Here are today's reports from the Justice Department, AP, Washington Post and NY Times. The WaPo article ends,

The FBI's handling of the investigation has been criticized by Ivins's colleagues and by independent analysts who have pointed out multiple gaps, including a lack of hair, fiber other physical evidence directly linking Ivins to the anthrax letters. But despite long delays and false leads, Justice officials Friday expressed satisfaction with the outcome.

The evidence "established that Dr. Ivins, alone, mailed the anthrax letters," the Justice summary stated.

Actually, the 96 page FBI report is predicated on the assumption that the anthrax letters attack was carried out by a "lone nut." The FBI report fails to entertain the possibility that the letters attack could have involved more than one actor. The FBI admits that about 400 people may have had access to Ivins' RMR-1029 anthrax preparation, but asserts all were "ruled out" as lone perpetrators. FBI never tried to rule any out as part of a conspiracy, however.

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2010/02/fbi-case-clo...

Hot links at link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. What evidence "established that Dr. Ivins, alone, mailed the anthrax letters" ?
I have yet to see one shred of evidence proving that.

The one they floated, trying to even place him in Princeton at the time of the mailing was blown out of the water by their own evidence as you capably caught. back then.

Admittedly, I haven't had time to sift through the new materials they have released, but actual evidence of Ivins mailing the letters should have been a big enough breakthrough to be highlighted.

Thanks for posting Dr. Nass's piece. She has done exceptional investigation of this, unlike that bureau with the 3 letters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-20-10 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. Fabricating B#llshit Incessantly?
Edited on Sat Feb-20-10 03:21 PM by EFerrari
:rofl:

Oh, geeze. I can hear my emails being sorted now. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 02nd 2014, 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC