"I don't think the FBI knows what the FBI knows" – Richard Clark testifying before the 9/11 Commission
In the summer of 2001, two hijackers were renting lodgings from an FBI asset in San Diego, California. But the FBI couldn't be bothered to know in the same way that they ran off John O'Neill when he was "on fire" about Bin Laden and they couldn't be bothered to listen to him. The next thing you know, thousands of people are dead, John O'Neill is dead and there's a scar in the heart of Manhattan. In 2005, the FBI is sure, knows with cold institutional certainty that Steve Hatfill is the anthrax mailer and before you can turn around, they're paying out 5 million dollars for ruining the life of an innocent man and publicly, too, by pillorying him in the press. You'd think they'd have learned by now. You'd think they'd have a picture of Richard Jewell up in every single FBI office and a special promise to say silently every morning before sitting down to the day's work.
You'd think by now the FBI would have a long needed moment of ontological panic and ask themselves how they know what they know. In 2003, they mapped out every single minute of Steve Hatfill's life on the days surrounding the two anthrax mailings and they were not loathe to announce that to the New York Times. But in the last few weeks, when they were accusing Bruce Ivins in the press, they didn't seem to know that Ivins couldn't be in Frederick, Maryland at 4:30 and in Princeton, New Jersey at 5:00 p.m. on September 17th, 2001, although they seemed to know each fact separately. It's as if the FBI has had the membrane connecting the two lobes of its institutional brain slashed, isolating one working hemisphere from the other.
The FBI claims that new technology can trace DNA from the weapon to Dr. Ivins when the tech to map a genome was available in 1998 and while withholding the exact nature of that new technology. Do you believe in magic? They claim that Ivins was the sole custodian of that flask of anthrax but do not mention the origins of that anthrax at the Dugway Proving Ground and they also elide the fact that ten other researchers had access to that same anthrax at Fort Detrick alone. And that's without considering all the researchers and labs that obtained samples from Dr. Ivins over the years, or the fact that Ivins helped evaluate the letter sent to Tom Daschle. The FBI is dealing with a crime scene faceted over space and time as if it was a simple plane, or a projection, a Power Point presentation they can point to unambiguously. The FBI does not know what it knows. Richard Clarke was right.
I'd like to ask them if Bruce Ivins was so careful that he could drive weaponized anthrax two hundred miles and mail it without leaving any trace at all on his person, in his car or around his residence or, if he was so careless that he mailed anthrax to Pat Leahy and Tom Daschle and didn't know that postal machines would pound the deadly powder out into the public sphere long before the envelopes were delivered. Which is it?
The FBI has said Bruce Ivins was afraid his vaccine program would be canceled and that motivated him to mail the anthrax. How is that possible? Ivins had a new vaccine in the works. No matter what happened to the BioPort vaccine he had been hired to fix, Dr. Ivins would get work. Make no mistake about it. Even if BioPort's product went down in flames, Dr. Ivins had another vaccine in development and his expertise would be in demand. There is always work for skilled people like Bruce Ivins. As a consumer of the BioPort vaccine himself, Bruce was as motivated as anyone to get a better vaccine in place.
In 2001, the FBI knew the anthrax mailer was a loner Source: Los Angeles Times, November 10, 2001.
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and MEGAN GARVEY, TIMES STAFF WRITERS
WASHINGTON -- The FBI is increasingly convinced that the person behind the recent anthrax attacks is a lone wolf within the United States who has no links to terrorist groups but is an opportunist using the Sept. 11 hijackings to vent his rage, investigators said Friday.
The FBI is still pushing the idea that Ivins fits the "loner" description. But he doesn't. He was a married man with two adopted children, with mentees and colleagues and neighbors.
Fairfield resident recalls time at Fort Detrick; worked with suspected anthrax terrorist
While civilians like Battersby work at Fort Detrick, the site has military management, she said. And some people, such as those who want to advance their careers, have stayed quiet about their experience there, according to Battersby. (Emphasis added.)
But the few people not worried about talking about their experience with the government should talk, she said. "It's painful to me on a whole bunch of levels," Battersby said. "I feel like I should tell my story because I know I can." (Emphasis added.)
Are people who knew Bruce Ivins afraid to speak out for fear of losing their jobs if they disagree with what the FBI "knows"? Battersby seems to say exactly that.
OUR HOUSE AND SENATE ARE GIVEN A CHOICE, FOLLOW THE GLOBAL ELITE CORP AGENDA, OUR HAVE A LITTLE ANTHRAX SENT TO YOU OR MAY BE YOUR FAMILY, OUR IF YOU PLAY BALL WE WILL SEE ARE YOU TAKING CARE OF AND GET RICH AT THE SAME TIME. HERE;S A DUM QUESTION WITCH WOULD YOU CHOOSE?
by
rich racer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 229 comments)
on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 at 7:59:04 AM
Comment from Ratings: Although I have got to admit I am so far down the rabbit hole; my opinion can no longer be considered unbiased.
Since December 2001, I no longer believe a single thing the FBI says about anything. That is when they replaced 100% of their (19, I think) division heads. I remember reading this in a two inch article in the New York Times "hidden" in the back pages. I brought up this astounding news to several of my well-read friends, none of which had heard of it and who doubted that it was true. It simply wasn't being commented on anywhere. My tin-hat conclusion was that the FBI had been taken over by the White House and it still is.
While I admire the restraint and personal perspective of Ms Ferrari, I found myself wanting more from the article. I wanted to find more mention of what I consider the prime targets of the anthrax - Leahy and Daschle, and what I think was the intended consequences - the swift passage of the Patriot Act.
I do agree with the author that the randomized aspect of the other targets served an additional purpose of further terrifying the US population but still conclude that they were victims to provide "cover" for the intended targets.
I am probably wrong but from the dozens of articles I've read on this subject, I think the prime suspect is Mr Ivins former boss, Dr Philip Zackerie, an Israeli citizen. This whole affair smells like a Mossad operation to me as a set-up for us to attack Iraq...
Like I said, I am too far down the rabbit hole to be considered unbiased but am hopeful that this article (and others like it) will keep the investigation alive.
by
szn46 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 26 comments)
on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 at 5:29:39 PM
Last week, the FBI floated the idea in the press (WaPo)
that Dr. Ivins took off work early on 9/17/2001 to mail the anthrax.
When some of us did the math and found he could not have done that, they changed their story. This week's yarn, again hosted at the WaPo, is that he drove that night.
How can they "close" the case when they don't even have a coherent narrative?
This week, skeptics began to be attacked in the press, via the Associated Press. We're "conspiracy theorists" and even, "anti-semites". The New Normal, I suppose, when being able to do basic math and to read is somehow proof your tinfoil is on too tightly.
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
