Ivins Could Not Have Coated the Killer Anthrax with High-Tech Anti-Clumping Agents


As everyone knows, the government initially tried to blame Iraq for the anthrax attack. One of the claims made was that the anthrax contained bentonite clay, which was also used by Iraqi anthrax bioweapons makers to "weaponize" the anthrax by decreasing the tendency of anthrax spores to clump together (which makes them less deadly since clumping reduces the amount of spores which end up in the target's lungs).

The government later disclaimed that assertion. However, the FBI now claims that the killer anthrax contained silicon. Silicon can be used as an anti-clumping agent to weaponize anthrax.

For example, McClatchy notes:

"Some of Ivins' former colleagues also dispute the FBI's assertion that he had the capability to mill tiny anthrax spores and then bind them to silicon particles, the form of anthrax that was mailed to the office of then-senator Tom Daschle, D-S.D."

And as New Scientist writes, FBI agents "mention a 'silicon signature' for the anthrax in the envelopes with no further comment. Silica may be used to weaponise spore powders."

Evidence for the theory that the anthrax used in the attacks was coated with anti-clumping agents also comes from a a 2001 CBS article:

"When technicians at the Army biodefense lab in Fort Detrick, Md., tried to examine a sample from the Daschle letter under a microscope, it floated off the glass slide and was lost. "

Anthrax would normally clump, so the fact that it "floated off the glass slide" points to the anthrax being treated with anti-clumping and anti-static agents.

Why is this important?

It takes very sophisticated equipment and processes to coat something as small as an anthrax spore with anti-clumping agents:

"Only a sophisticated lab could have produced the material used in the Senate attack. This was the consensus among biodefense specialists working for the government and the military. In May 2002, 16 of these scientists and physicians published a paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association, describing the Senate anthrax powder as “weapons-grade” and exceptional: “high spore concentration, uniform particle size, low electrostatic charge, treated to reduce clumping” (JAMA, 1 May 2002, p. 2237)."

Indeed, the anthax sent in the letters was coated with a very rare, high-tech glass polymer nanomaterial:

More revealing than the electrostatic charge, some experts say, was a technique used to anchor silica nanoparticles to the surface of spores. About a year and a half ago, a laboratory analyzing the Senate anthrax spores for the FBI reported the discovery of what appeared to be a chemical additive that improved the bond between the silica and the spores. U.S. intelligence officers informed foreign biodefense off icials that this additive was “polymerized glass.” The officials who received this briefing—biowarfare specialists who work for the governments of two NATO countries—said they had never heard of polymerized glass before. This was not surprising. “Coupling agents” such as polymerized glass are not part of the usual tool kit of scientists and engineers making powders designed for human inhalation. Also known as “sol gel” or “spin-on-glass,” polymerized glass is “a silane or siloxane compound that’s been dissolved in an alcohol- based solvent like ethanol,” says Jacobsen. It leaves a thin glassy coating that helps bind the silica to particle surfaces.

Silica has been a staple in professionally engineered germ warfare powders for decades. (The Soviet Union added to its powders resin and a silica dust called Aerosil —a formulation requiring high heat to create nanoparticles, says Alibek. U.S. labs have tested an Aerosil variant called Cab-O-Sil, and declassified U.S. intelligence reports state that Iraq’s chemical and biological warfare labs imported tons of both Cab-O-Sil and Aerosil, also known as “solid smoke,” in the 1980s). “If there’s polymerized glass [in the Senate samples], it really narrows the field [of possible suspects],” says Jacobsen, who has been following the anthrax investigations keenly. “Polymerized glasses are exotic materials, and nanotechnology is something you just don’t do in your basement.”

By March 2002, federal investigators had lab results indicating that the Senate anthrax spores were treated with polymerized glass, and stories began to appear in the media. CNN reported an “unusual coating” on the spores, and Newsweek referred to a “chemical compound” that was “unknown to experts who have worked in the field for years.” When Science asked the FBI about the presence of polymerized glass in the Senate powder, an FBI spokesperson said the bureau “could not comment on an ongoing investigation.”

But Dr. Ivins was a vaccine researcher working in a lab where, according to his co-workers and supervisors, people went in and out all night checking on experiments, and Ivins did not have access to the extremely high-tech equipment which would have been necessary to produce the weaponized anthrax. He wasn't one of the count-on-one-hand group of people who knew how to coat coat anthrax spores with anti-clumping agents.

Moreover, Ivins was one of the lead researchers helping the FBI investigate the anthrax murders. Remember, CBS wrote "when technicians at the Army biodefense lab in Fort Detrick, Md., tried to examine a sample from the Daschle letter under a microscope, it floated off the glass slide and was lost." This implies that the Ft. Detrick scientists, including Ivins, had never handled this kind of weaponized anthrax before.

The media has rightly been questioning whether or not Ivins knew how to dry anthrax. And his colleagues are right to question whether Ivins, a vaccine expert, could have made anthrax as pure and concentrated as the killer anthrax (for example, a former director of the bacteriology division at Ft. Detrick said the anthrax sent to Daschle was "so concentrated and so consistent and so clean that I would assert that Bruce could not have done that part").

But the media is missing another large part of the story . . . it is very doubtful that Ivins knew how to weaponize the anthrax spores with advanced anti-clumping agents.

Bruce Ivins was the third person they tried to frame

August 5, 2008

Alex Jones and Mike Rivero discuss in detail the timeline of the government's investigation of the anthrax attacks that occurred shortly after the attacks of 9/11.


Francis A Boyle, University of Illinois Law Professor and person who wrote bio-terrorism laws signed by first President George Bush, reported shortly after the anthrax attacks to FBI Agent Marion "Spike" Bowman that the anthrax was produced at an American military lab. Agent Bowman had met Professor Boyle at a bio-terrorism conference earlier. The FBI responded by destroying the database that Professor Boyle used and the good professor was placed on a no-fly list.

another govt murder

killed to take the fall ,another patsy like oswald
[ apologies to noam chomsky]

more proof that Ivins is being patsy-ized by the FBI

No matter who the individual was who actually put the stuff in the envelopes, I am confident they did it at the behest of higher ups in the Bush Crime Family. My suspects are Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.

The blatantly obvious cover up continues.

This country has been taken over by a fascistic mafia style cabal often referred to as the Bush Crime Family.

Will there ever be justice?

Get her done.


Also John Amato over at Crooks and Liars dot com has shown an interest in the Anthrax story. It wouldn't hurt to email him and his staff pertinent information.


I do it of course, but the more the merrier at most things. Peace.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead

Violation of federal law

"U.S. labs have tested an Aerosil variant called Cab-O-Sil"

Creating any bio-weapon is a federal crime, banned by the convention on biological warfare, and listed in the US Code as a felony.

Anyone -- that's anyone -- creating biological weapons is guilty of a felony.

These stories never bring up the criminal nature of the work at Fort Deitrich. This insanity must stop.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

GW, you did a great job of writing this technology laden piece..

You relayed the information so that a layperson can understand the process. Thanks.

Great job

You have been doing a great job covering this story. I hope you collect all of your information into a single post, because taken together we see the big picture.
Arabesque: 911 Truth

Real Evidence

GW-Great job! Let's look at some real evidence....

According to the FBI they claim Dr Irvins made the most potent
anthrax known to man all by himself in 12 hours..over the weekend of 9/14 15th and 16th. In less than 12 hours he was finished.

There is no proof of that.

He then after work on the 17th drove 4 hours to put the anthrax into a mailbox, and then drove 4 hours back and was at work the next morning on the 18th.

There is no proof of that.

But during the investigation for the first time ever it came out that the U.S. Army had been making weaponized anthrax for a decade. In batches of 10 grams....and it takes some time to make....I offer........

"Dugway's production of weapons-grade anthrax, which has never before been publicly revealed".....

"In my opinion, there are maybe four or five people in the whole country who might be able to make this stuff, and I'm one of them," said Richard O. Spertzel, chief biological inspector for the U.N. Special Commission from 1994 to 1998. "And even with a good lab and staff to help run it, it might take me a year to come up with a product as good."

"For nearly a decade, U.S. Army scientists at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have made small quantities of weapons-grade anthrax that is virtually identical to the powdery spores used in the mail attacks that have killed five people, government sources say."

"Dugway's Life Sciences Division makes the deadly spores in far, far smaller quantities, rarely accumulating more than 10 grams at a time, according to one Army official."

It has been estimated that the perpetrator used a total of about 10 grams in the letters.

excellent summary....jimd3100

Excellent summary of recent articles, jimd3100! Thanks!

...don't believe them!