Share

Identifying the Anthrax Killer

by:   |  The New York Times

photo
(Photos: FBI Archives)

    The F.B.I. seems convinced that it has finally solved the long-festering case of who mailed the anthrax letters that killed five people in 2001. Yet its description of the evidence pointing to a mentally disturbed Army bioweapons expert as the sole culprit leaves us uncertain about whether investigators have pulled off a brilliant coup after a bumbling start, or are prematurely declaring victory, despite a lack of hard, incontrovertible proof.

    Federal agents relied on sophisticated scientific tests and laborious investigative work to conclude that only Dr. Bruce Ivins, who killed himself last week, could have made and mailed the anthrax used in the letters. They say that recently developed tests enabled them to identify telltale genetic mutations in the anthrax and to show that it came from a flask kept by Dr. Ivins at the Army laboratories at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Md.

    More than 100 people might have had access to the deadly substance, but over a four-year period, investigators gradually eliminated suspects until only Dr. Ivins was left.

    None of the investigators' major assertions, however, have been tested in cross-examination or evaluated by outside specialists. It is imperative that federal officials make public all of their data so independent experts can judge whether the mailed anthrax was indeed identical to Dr. Ivins's supply and only that supply.

    It is also critical for officials to explain more fully how they eliminated the many other people with access to the material.

    The investigators came up with lots of circumstantial evidence to bolster their case. The envelopes used in the mailings had print defects that indicate that they could only have been bought at a small number of post offices, including one where Dr. Ivins had a mailbox under an assumed name. Dr. Ivins had obtained equipment that could turn his wet anthrax into the dry spores that were mailed.

    In the days before the mailings, he worked long hours alone at night and on weekends, outside his usual pattern. E-mail messages indicate that he was mentally disturbed and worried about an anthrax vaccine project that was failing, a possible motive for mailings to generate public fear about anthrax. There is also evidence that he had a history of driving to other locations to mail packages anonymously.

    But there is no direct evidence of his guilt. No witness who saw him pouring powdered anthrax into envelopes. No anthrax spores in his house or cars. No confession to a colleague or in a suicide note. No physical evidence tying him to the site in Princeton, N.J., from which the letters are believed to have been mailed.

    Because Dr. Ivins killed himself before he could be indicted, there will be no opportunity for an adversarial testing of the F.B.I.'s conclusions. The bureau, unfortunately, has a history of building circumstantial cases that seem compelling at first but ultimately fall apart. Congress will need to probe the adequacy of this investigation - and to insist that federal officials release as much evidence as possible, so the public can be assured they really did get the right person this time.

All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.

  

Comments

This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.

propaganda-- "It was as

propaganda-- "It was as though some huge force were pressing down upon you – something that penetrated inside your skull, battering against your brain, frightening you out of your beliefs, persuading you, almost to deny the evidence of your senses. . .The heresy of heresies was common sense. If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable-what then?. . .They told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their most essential command. . .and yet he was in the right! The obvious, the silly and the true had got to be defended!"-- George Orwell-- 1984

Y'all recall about a year or

Y'all recall about a year or two back how this outfit called by the acronym FBI finally had to admit that the scientific tests they could run on bullets to figure out exactly what batch they came from, which got many convictions that they probably would not otherwise have, were finally proved to be bogus? As I recall it wasn't the FBI that sleuthed out the bogus bullet test... Seems like their science ends once they can come up with a method that they can swear in a courtroom proves the guilty party, and their evidence from what I've seen so far has sounded an awful lot like they can tell us exactly where and when that batch of bullets was brewed up.

DEAD MEN CAN'T SPEAK!!

DEAD MEN CAN'T SPEAK!!

Although it is probable that

Although it is probable that the full story of the 2001 anthrax killings will never be known, the rush to declare the case closed seems misguided, if only from a standpoint of public trust. In the worst case, an alternative suspect or accomplice may go unpunished and therefore retain the potential to strike again. Certainly the proposed motives for Dr. Ivins’ alleged behavior seem unsatisfying. Could it have escaped his attention as an accomplished scientist that by falsely attributing the letters to foreign terrorists he was pushing his country closer to war?

1) By what logic does the

1) By what logic does the NYT refrain from calling the perpetrator of the bio-terror attacks by the word, *terrorist*? 2) Why does the NYT refrain from stating the obvious: the FBI now claims that the act of terrorism which greased the skids for the "Patriot" Act and the illegal war against Iraq act was produced by a top US government scientist at the US's top terror weapon facility? 3) Why does the NYT refrain from pointing out that we have just learned from nothing less than the FBI that at least one of the two acts of terrorism that has ruined our economy and emasculated the Bill of Rights was the product of *surprise* the US government's top weapon lab? 4) Why does the NYT refrain from printing the fact that many of bio-weapons as well as their precursers were sent to Iraq (and God only knows where else) by both US government labs such as Ft. Detrich or by US government subsidized labs?

Mysteriously missing from

Mysteriously missing from all reports are the "three", then "four" reliable reports from within Ft. Detrick that "bentonite" had been found in the anthrax sample, a "clear indication" that the anthrax had come from Sadam Hussein. Unless ABC is lying, these three or four witnesses were just plain lying--no bentonite was found--ever, even by mistake--in the anthrax. Therefore several people presumably in collusion at Ft. Detrick, wanted to point the blame at Iraq. How about the "Camel club" that harassed the Egyptian doctor so badly? Such collusion demands investigation.

How many people engaged in

How many people engaged in criminal activity of any kind do so in front of witnesses, or fail to make every effort to eliminate evidence of the crime? The fact that there were no witnesses or telltale evidence in his house is a weak argument, at best.

His connection with the

His connection with the Right To Life Movement as discussed here http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=11210 are most interesting.

Several of the commentators

Several of the commentators miss the point. This guy is a patsy, just another "lone crazy gunman" like Oswald, Ruby, Sirhan Sirhan, etc. Whenever it's a lone gunman, assume the opposite. In fact, the White House/FBI used the Anthrax attack itself as a pretext to shift the massive FBI investigation then getting underway into the 9/11 over the Anthrax events. Another smoke and mirrors, bait and switch tactic like they always use make us see what they want us to see. This poor sap probably threatened to spill the beans, so they helped him to commit "suicide", another well-used tactic. Like one commentator said, who gets it: Dead man can't speak!

He was mean and he stomped

He was mean and he stomped on bugs (not the microbial kind). He was THE lone anthrax killer, just like Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman. Funny. How the media mentions his spike in after hours lab work in the months before the (but not mentioning 9/11) attacks. Strange that his "spike" in preparations for his evil deeds served the government's so cause well in the immediate aftermath, to ramp up the "war on terror", as, another "bad apple" falls not so far from the tree. I hope the investigations stop in their tracks, in like manner, when I single handedly brings down the US economy.

In preparation for

In preparation for conviction motive is usually part of the evidence. The once mentioned motive for money for himself has been discredited and no new one has surfaced. And,, new funding did go to chemical agents and their vaccines so some people have profited. But how and why did he choose his victims? Is there a reason that 2 leading Democrats who could have stopped or altered the patriot act were men he wanted to scare or kill? FBI, show us motive.

Check and see what

Check and see what "legislation" was "rammed" through during this time of confusion, disruption and sleight of hand. Welcome to Babylon!

Perhaps he had successfully

Perhaps he had successfully completed the vaccine he had worked on for so many years. At that time, bush's special agents swooped in and took it, destroying the evidence (Ivins), and then making up this story to throw off any other investigation.

Who's writing is on the

Who's writing is on the envelopes?