Washington Post Editorial: Answers in 2001 Anthrax Attacks are still elusive.

Answers in 2001 anthrax attacks are still elusive

Thursday, February 17, 2011

RESOLUTION OF THE 2001 anthrax attacks continues to prove elusive.

The Justice Department and the FBI identified Maryland scientist Bruce E. Ivins as having single-handedly carried out the attacks that killed five people and seriously sickened 17 others. The department was on the verge of seeking an indictment in 2008 when Mr. Ivins took his own life.

Doubts lingered about Mr. Ivins's guilt, in part because the FBI had had its sights on a different Maryland scientist for several years before admitting he was not the culprit. Now, a report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) raises new questions about whether Mr. Ivins was wrongly accused.

The lengthy report cites several instances in which the Justice Department appears to have overstated the strength of the scientific evidence against Mr. Ivins. For example, the department concluded that anthrax spores derived from the RMR-1029 vial in Mr. Ivins's lab were used in the deadly attacks. The report takes exception. "We find the scientific evidence to be consistent with their conclusions but not as definitive as stated," said Lehigh University President Alice Gast, who led the NAS committee. The report insinuates throughout that FBI failure to perform more tests or to be more precise could have erroneously eliminated other suspects or prematurely settled on Mr. Ivins as a suspect.

Yet the report itself is at times misleading. Take, for example, the FBI's assertion that Mr. Ivins deceived investigators by providing a sample purported to be from RMR-1029 but that the FBI concluded could not have come from that particular batch. "The genetic evidence that a disputed sample submitted by the suspect came from a source other than RMR-1029 was weaker" than stated by the Justice Department, the committee said. How much weaker? The NAS panel concluded that there was a 1 percent chance that the sample came from the key vial; that answer could be found only deep in the bowels of the document.

The NAS committee should not be blamed for nitpicking over the test results; that is essentially what it was tasked to do by the FBI, which commissioned its report. But the result is not satisfying - nor is it conclusive.

Congress should convene a nonpartisan commission staffed with individuals experienced in law enforcement to probe all of the evidence in the case, including that which the FBI claims shows Mr. Ivins had the opportunity and the wherewithal to carry out the 2001 attack. The inquiry should explore why and how the Justice Department eliminated other scientists who had access to RMR-1029 as suspects, and it should examine the security protocols at repositories for biological weapons. The exploration also should focus on the country's preparedness to deal with such an attack in the future.


*hat tip to vitamax

The mainstream media is

The mainstream media is starting to turn. People should flood the comment stream for this story on the post website. Keep up public pressure and awareness we can win! Repost the story and write your congresspeople too!

Repost the story...

The comments section is closed after just 8 comments. Check them out. People are awake!

Repost the story widely.


People are awake and ready for our message, all we have to do is bring it and they will follow us! Those comments are great and they should show all of us something: we can have a mass movement if we want it, we just have to clean up our act and get professional.

No comments

It now just says "0 comments" and "Comments are closed.

So they deleted all the comments after closing the comments?


The government is going to investigate itself (NOT!). A nonpartisan commission? ahem. Where have we heard that before? But assuming it is a good idea, why not piggyback an investigation of the events of 9-11, since the two episodes seem to be related.

Don't promote defeatism

The world is changing!

I hope you are right

The world is changing, but the Washington Post? Please explain to me why IT is changing. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.

The media environment is

The media environment is different now. I would describe the momentum around the world for free and accurate information as a thawing of the chilling effect of the Bush years. It has become less of a taboo for journalists to ask tough questions in the new media environment. The new media environment is the effect also of the waning influence of the 911 attacks and War on Terrorism meme on popular consciousness. Under Bush there was a concerted effort to preserve a bunker mentality in the whole country. Now as the mentality fades the media stories are beginning to reflect the change in consciousness of our culture. I believe in the power of positive change, and I think slow and steady is winning this race.

Í sometimes get the feeling

that people believe that everything is gonna become allright when this new investigation into these anthrax attacks as well as the 9/11 attacks gets underway, or even when we're finally in a courtroom where the suspects will have to answer the tough questions. Of course a new investigation don't mean nothing, and even some kind of verdict would not guarantee anything. Our situation is pretty grim, and it will take a lot more than just a general public that has fugured out they've been lied to (mostly all of their lives) and want to see real justice for the crimes of 9/11. It goes way beyond that. Our adversary (let's say at least the people who planned 9/11, who knows who else might be involved)) has settled into just about every aspect of our lives, and we're almost completely dependant on it (that has to change if we're gonna stand a chance). There's so much more we have to consider and think about, so much more possible (violent) reactions that we can expact from the PTB, once they realize things are getting out of hand, and perhaps out of their control. I'm sure they've calculated every possible move we can make, every possible situation that can arise, and have thought out all kinds of responses to that.

I don't wanna sound negative or defeated in any way, I'm just looking at the larger picture here, and what maight be ahead for us, the people. Too often I'm reading comments here suggesting to me that after we get the new imparial investigation and subsequent courtproceedings we will "have won", I'm sure you're not one of them. In fact, I'm sure most people know that it would only be the beginning of a much larger transformation that will have to take place, if we as a race are to live in relative peace and freedom, while having to do the necessary work to clean up all of our shit, our legacy of the past couple of centuries.

I'd like to read our thoughts on this, because I for one, haven't read much about this subject hardly anywhere. One thing I do know; it's not gonna be without violence, which is what scares me somewhat. Violence is what we can and must expect. But I believe that we must have some kind of detailed plan what to do, and how to respond (with non-violence) to the various reactions that we can expect from the PTB, if we can ever achieve our dream of living together in peace and properity.

Anthrax Information Resources

Graeme MacQueen Interview.
MP3 file: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/resistanceradio/2011/02/10/911-in-context-w...
Spread it around. Add it to your Anthrax information file/collection.


Wall Street Journal (2010) - The Anthrax Attacks Remain Unsolved
The FBI disproved its main theory about how the spores were weaponized.

Congressional investigators plan to examine how the FBI determined that one scientist was responsible for the deadly 2001 anthrax attacks - http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/investigators-review-fbi-anthrax/

"On the night of the Sept. 11 attacks, the White House Medical Office dispensed Cipro to staff accompanying Vice President Dick Cheney as he was secreted off to the safety of Camp David, and told them it was "a precaution," according to one person directly involved."
"Let me put it this way," Bush said. "I'm confident that when I come to work tomorrow, I'll be safe."

Anthrax War Documentary 1/7

ANTHRAX WAR is an investigative documentary about the 2001 U.S. Anthrax Attacks, a trail of dead scientists and the dark secrets of germ war research.
The film begins in the days following the 9/11 terrorist attacks when anthrax-laced letters, mailed to media offices in New York and to the U.S. Senate in Washington, spread fear and panic across the United States and beyond.

Additional Resources:

NAS & NRC; Are we missing an opportunity here?

The report is quite interesting. I have much more to read yet, but it got me thinking. What prompted the National Academy of Sciences and the National Research Council to conduct such a review? How was it prompted? authorized? funded? Here is the website to the report, it's available free online to read:


and according to the site, here are the authoring organizations;

* Board on Life Sciences (BLS)
* Committee on Science, Technology, and Law (CSTL)
* Earth and Life Studies (DELS)

Is there an application that could be submitted to request a feasability study done of the NIST conclusions of WTC7 Report? Twin Towers? Keep a running report of the results and each response given (as I am sure there will be resistance.) and hold their feet to the fire? Let's face it, how can an 8 story tall, 100 meter wide section of a modern steel and concrete building just disappear like that? It's an absurdity. See if we can make them defend an absurdity. If we can't make the NYC council or Congress investigate, maybe this could be avenue? I'd chip-in for that.

just a thought.


NJ Congressman Rush Holt

asked the NAS (National Academy of Sciences) to look into this.

Some of the Anthrax was mailed in a drop mail box on Nassau St. in Princeton.

(Rumsfield. Buzzy Kronguard, Frank Carlucci & other 911 suspects, are all graduates of Princeton)