. . . and NOW I s'pose you godless heathen libruls is a-gonna say stuff like: "Gee . . . sounds FISHY."
ndtovent
· 1 year ago
I read that article in the post and that first quote (#1) got me to thinking also.. If his closest colleagues who worked with him every day say it couldn't be done, then how could he have done it? We'll see if more evidence unfolds as the investigation continues. I feel sorry for the guy's family.
LawMichigander
· 1 year ago
Well here are the options of who did it: The U.S. Government, a former U.S. Government backed puppet state, a terrorist organization that bought it from a former U.S. backed puppet state, or the U.S. government or a worker thereof.
KarenMrsLloydRichards
· 1 year ago
Sen McCain said that the anthrax attacks were "possibly" by Saddam Hussein, and, hey, that's enough for an illegal war and invasion of choice, and a disastrous, 3-trillion dollar occupation which strengthened America's real antagonist, Iran!
vkobaya
· 1 year ago
Wrong! America's real antagonist is George Bush and the Bush administration. He has ground out Constitution under his despotic heels, indiscriminately turning us into a terrorist state, even carrying out acts of terrorism against our own people. During the 2004 elections when there was a mass protest in New York there was a photo of an NYPD cop armed with a fully automatic assault rifle watching the crowds of protestors. That was revolting. He was carrying that extremely murderous weapon not to guard the crowds against terrorists, but to use on American citizen protestors if the orders were given to massacre American citizen protestors. During the mass riots in France, the French authorities refrained from using any lethal weapons for riot control despite the fact that most of the protestors were Arabs and Muslims. British Bobbies are still not armed. We are far, far down the road to totalitarianism, already well passed the point of no return.
bluestockton
· 1 year ago
John, did you forget Eric Rudolph and Paul Hill? There are self-styled pro-lifers who think "save the babies" and "kill the abortionists" are perfectly consistent.
tlsintx
· 1 year ago
there's a picture of the US Attorney announcing that the government could have proven Ivins' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, (if he hadn't been suicided) and the guy was just sweating like a pig.
MommaKat
· 1 year ago
the whole pro-lfe=mass murderer assumption won't get any fallout, dontcha know!! Nothing we'll hear anywhere but these blogs (here, Huff, DKos) anyway, and possibly on Countdown.
And I just LOVE this one, "some colleagues say it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for Ivins to do the conversion unnoticed" Right, try absofreakinglutely impossible. That just isn't a one 'man' job to begin with, and certainly NOT when you're working w/ something like anthrax. This is one of those areas where the Feds can count on the 'public' not having enough knowledge to call bullshit, and there being too few people with enough knowledge to do so. So convient they waited to release all this so-called evidence until after he committed suicide.
devis1
· 1 year ago
The mad scientists demise from an overdose of Tylenol - who really needs to read any further.
scottinsf
· 1 year ago
Oh Elmer, that dog stinks to high heaven.
Indigo
· 1 year ago
The X-Files division of the FBI is working overtime.
mf_roe
· 1 year ago
Ivins may have had knowledge dangerous to the people responsible and may have been neutralized when he refused to cooperate. This has all the hallmarks of a last minute frame job. The FBI was exposed fabricating evidence a few years ago, the fact that a key part of their case involves a "NEW" genetic test smells of Limburger.
donotmakemecomedownthere
· 1 year ago
"Anthrax Guy." Perfect.
They've already turned this guy into an animated Fox series.
rblackula
· 1 year ago
The anthrax DNA sequence and specific mutations evidently narrow it down to one flask, under Ivin's control. There's been years of work gone into this, and I know the scientists involved. Please understand that in court this would have been presented in detail, with lawyers and other experts challenging it.
mf_roe
· 1 year ago
"I know the scientists involved" great way to enhance your credibility.
donotmakemecomedownthere
· 1 year ago
Now we'll never know, will we?
MommaKat
· 1 year ago
Sorry rblackula, but you'll have to pander that elsewhere. Just how does knowing the scientists involved convey any definitive knowledge to you? I walked away from a (very lucrative) career in Molecular Cellular Developmental Biology due to the culture of secrecy and intentional misinformation in the field.
You do make my earlier point for me though, as you refer to mutations and DNA sequence narrowing 'it' down. Truth is anthrax is monomorphic so assays look at single nucleotide polymorphisms for identification, not mutations. In fact, the strain and the plasmids are considerd relatively evolutionarily stable. They've known for quite some time that it was the Ames strain used in the letters, but they've offered no credible evidence for how they link the Ames strain found in the letters to that in the flask. Moreover, the flask contained liquid anthrax, the envelopes powder, which makes no sense given the difficulty in conversion from bacteria in liquid to spores in powder. Where's the evidence that Ivins somehow accomplished this solo (impossible), and since they'd be working backwards where's the proof he's the guy who dispersed it along w/ how he dispersed it?
I may have some background info, but I know you don't need it to know this smells worse than dead fish (or strep growing on an agar plate!)
devis1
· 1 year ago
O/T but in the same realm. US finds disappeared (FIVE years disappeared with her 3 children) Pakistani Woman outside of an Afghan police dept with terrist stuff. She was arraigned in NY court on Tuesday. The FBI's been looking for her since 2004....Why no full court press on this one?
If you'll recall, during the Clinton years, they thought the FBI had their guy for the Olympic Park bombings and harassed Richard Jewell to no end. The increased incompetence of the Bush administration years have led the American public to trust the FBI and other Federal institutions even less.
rblackula - The Federal government probably hasn't had this much of a trust problem since the early to mid 1970s. And it's probably worse than it was then. If the FBI wants to sell this story, they're going to have to do better than this. If they have the evidence that they think would have held up in court, they need to get it out in the open and be done with it.
What they've released so far sounds quite bizarre and far-fetched. The mistrust goes beyond the case itself to motivation - the anthrax scares were a part of the whole run up to the Iraq War and the public was fed bogus information by the administration on other fronts.
The FBI not only needs to demonstrate that he did it, but had clear personal motivations to do it. Otherwise, the public, smelling a fish, will still think that the guy is a patsy for someone in the military or CIA that would have benefited from the anthrax scare and the connections the administration was trying to make to terrorism. The FBI, in what they've released so far, haven't established clear motivation.
vkobaya
· 1 year ago
The strongest evidence I know against this bullshit is that it is axiomatic that the Bush administration never, never tells the truth. I think they are congenitally incapable.
Ben Dover
· 1 year ago
I believe the FBI's anthrax "story" like I believe the official explanation of Building 7's demise.
bumpkis
· 1 year ago
Paging Dr. Zack, please pick up a white courtesy phone.
mf_roe
· 1 year ago
Why wasn't Ivins' security clearance pulled? Why was security at the BIO Labs so lax? Was Ivins working on "weaponizing" or counter-acting Anthrax?
april25
· 1 year ago
Q: What motive would Ivins have had to unleash an attack? Your answer is not what the FBI stated. If you are going to pretend to be a news source, or at least a web site some some semblance of credibility .. get your story straight.. this from a guy who has NO interest in this case, or the FBI. I just can't stand ignorant websters posting whatever they think is correct with no correlation with reality.
PeteWa
· 1 year ago
Welcome to the Banana Republica of America. This bullshit story makes the FBI look like total idiots and incompetent shlubs. Heck of a job... heck of a job.
xjn
· 1 year ago
A TERRORIST, a terrorist that the government knew apparently beyond a shadow of a doubt had actually killed 5 Americans on American soil, was allowed to run around free for something like a year and a half as a suspect, was informed that he would soon be prosecuted, but apparently not monitored very closely or was at the very least given enough leeway to kill himself.
Didn't we have some place we put terrorists until we figure out if they're terrorists or not... what was that place called? I remember it was very important for some reason and lots of very scary terrorists were there because they were terrorists. and there was good food or something.
We put SUSPECTED terrorists there. because the government suspected them. Here we have the government claiming this is an ACTUAL terrorist, no doubt about it... no need to look into it any further, and he's not even taken into custody... nothing to see here folks, move along.
I mean we have an air tight case against this guy and all... right?
cowboyneok
· 1 year ago
It would just be "absurd" for anyone to think our government is hiding something.
Right, White House Press Spokesperson
Asterix
· 1 year ago
It's nice to see that the FBI is learning as they go along. To avoid another Brandon Mayfield type screwup, they had the guy "suicide". He''s dead; He dunnit; we got our man.
bobbyjoe
· 1 year ago
Yeah, he was against abortion, which is why the anthrax attacks were accompanied by block-lettered, misspelled (deliberately?) handwritten letters that read "Death to America" and "Death to Israel." Mmmmm Hmmm. Anybody remember those clumsy attempts made by the perp(s) to make it look like it was a terrorist? The references to "Allah"?
And why "four well-placed but separate sources" in the Bush administration were telling news outlets like ABC News almost immediately that the chemical additive bentonite had been detected in the anthrax samples (turns out now it wasn't). From these sources, ABC News was telling people, quote, ""only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons.," i.e., the anthrax must have come from Iraq.
Glenn Greenwald has been all over this in the last week or so. ABC knows who these "well placed" sources are in the Bush administration who inaruably (according to the FBI's findings) lied about the link to Iraq, through ABC, to put out a false story to the American people. ABC has no reason to protect false or deliberately misleading sources, no? And, in fact, is sitting on what should be quite a story about the abuse of government through deliberate media manipulation to lead us into war. But guess what ABC is NOT doing. If you guessed "not revealing who the well placed Bush administration figures were who deliberately made it seem like the anthrax was linked to Iraq" you win the prize.
And how much reminding us of those fake "terrorist" letters that accompanied the anthrax attacks have you seen the mainstream media do in this story?
Nope, it's about just one crazy dude who was upset about abortion.
Pathetic.
jr
· 1 year ago
Dr. Philip Zack is the anthrax mailer doods
xjn
· 1 year ago
make sure he doesn't get a hold of a bunch of tylenol...
LeftCoastOracle
· 1 year ago
OK somebody dust off your investigative skills and look into this aspect of this mess: the timing of attacks on Tom Daschle and Pat Leahy vis a vis passage of some pretty scary legislation on homeland security. I don't know how they voted but I do wonder whether their votes changed after the attacks.
No I'm not paranoid. I'm just skeptical of coincidences and do not trust this administration. I think there are some pretty scary people in the White House and believe they are fully capable of clandestine attacks on U.S. citizens whom they perceive to be 'in their way.' After all they lied about WMD and Al Qaeda to justify attacking Iraq.
All Comments
And I just LOVE this one, "some colleagues say it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for Ivins to do the conversion unnoticed" Right, try absofreakinglutely impossible. That just isn't a one 'man' job to begin with, and certainly NOT when you're working w/ something like anthrax. This is one of those areas where the Feds can count on the 'public' not having enough knowledge to call bullshit, and there being too few people with enough knowledge to do so. So convient they waited to release all this so-called evidence until after he committed suicide.
They've already turned this guy into an animated Fox series.
You do make my earlier point for me though, as you refer to mutations and DNA sequence narrowing 'it' down. Truth is anthrax is monomorphic so assays look at single nucleotide polymorphisms for identification, not mutations. In fact, the strain and the plasmids are considerd relatively evolutionarily stable. They've known for quite some time that it was the Ames strain used in the letters, but they've offered no credible evidence for how they link the Ames strain found in the letters to that in the flask. Moreover, the flask contained liquid anthrax, the envelopes powder, which makes no sense given the difficulty in conversion from bacteria in liquid to spores in powder. Where's the evidence that Ivins somehow accomplished this solo (impossible), and since they'd be working backwards where's the proof he's the guy who dispersed it along w/ how he dispersed it?
I may have some background info, but I know you don't need it to know this smells worse than dead fish (or strep growing on an agar plate!)
http://www.dawn.com/2008/08/07/top7.htm
rblackula - The Federal government probably hasn't had this much of a trust problem since the early to mid 1970s. And it's probably worse than it was then. If the FBI wants to sell this story, they're going to have to do better than this. If they have the evidence that they think would have held up in court, they need to get it out in the open and be done with it.
What they've released so far sounds quite bizarre and far-fetched. The mistrust goes beyond the case itself to motivation - the anthrax scares were a part of the whole run up to the Iraq War and the public was fed bogus information by the administration on other fronts.
The FBI not only needs to demonstrate that he did it, but had clear personal motivations to do it. Otherwise, the public, smelling a fish, will still think that the guy is a patsy for someone in the military or CIA that would have benefited from the anthrax scare and the connections the administration was trying to make to terrorism. The FBI, in what they've released so far, haven't established clear motivation.
Your answer is not what the FBI stated. If you are going to pretend to be a news source, or at least a web site some some semblance of credibility .. get your story straight.. this from a guy who has NO interest in this case, or the FBI. I just can't stand ignorant websters posting whatever they think is correct with no correlation with reality.
Heck of a job... heck of a job.
Didn't we have some place we put terrorists until we figure out if they're terrorists or not... what was that place called? I remember it was very important for some reason and lots of very scary terrorists were there because they were terrorists. and there was good food or something.
We put SUSPECTED terrorists there. because the government suspected them. Here we have the government claiming this is an ACTUAL terrorist, no doubt about it... no need to look into it any further, and he's not even taken into custody... nothing to see here folks, move along.
I mean we have an air tight case against this guy and all... right?
Right, White House Press Spokesperson
And why "four well-placed but separate sources" in the Bush administration were telling news outlets like ABC News almost immediately that the chemical additive bentonite had been detected in the anthrax samples (turns out now it wasn't). From these sources, ABC News was telling people, quote, ""only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons.," i.e., the anthrax must have come from Iraq.
Glenn Greenwald has been all over this in the last week or so. ABC knows who these "well placed" sources are in the Bush administration who inaruably (according to the FBI's findings) lied about the link to Iraq, through ABC, to put out a false story to the American people. ABC has no reason to protect false or deliberately misleading sources, no? And, in fact, is sitting on what should be quite a story about the abuse of government through deliberate media manipulation to lead us into war. But guess what ABC is NOT doing. If you guessed "not revealing who the well placed Bush administration figures were who deliberately made it seem like the anthrax was linked to Iraq" you win the prize.
And how much reminding us of those fake "terrorist" letters that accompanied the anthrax attacks have you seen the mainstream media do in this story?
Nope, it's about just one crazy dude who was upset about abortion.
Pathetic.
No I'm not paranoid. I'm just skeptical of coincidences and do not trust this administration. I think there are some pretty scary people in the White House and believe they are fully capable of clandestine attacks on U.S. citizens whom they perceive to be 'in their way.' After all they lied about WMD and Al Qaeda to justify attacking Iraq.