It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Strangely, Orszag additionally called out an effort to re-investigate the 2001 anthrax attacks, which have since been blamed on the deceased government scientist Bruce Ivins. An unnamed Obama administration official told Bloomberg News that if the 2010 Intelligence Budget demands another look at the FBI's conclusions, the bill would be vetoed.
The FBI's probe has been heavily criticized by members of Obama's own party for "numerous" mistakes made by the FBI during the lengthy inquiry. Joseph Michael, a scientist at the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico, also noted a key difference in "chemical fingerprints" between a flask linked to Ivins and the anthrax that was sent to government offices around the country.
At the FBI’s request, the National Academy of Sciences convened a 15-member panel to review the scientific soundness of the eight-year investigation. According to Elie Dolgin at Nature magazine, the FBI believes the scientific review of its own investigation to be “unprecedented,” but at least one member of Congress, Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), thinks the case deserves another look, suggesting that the FBI's investigators themselves be investigated.
Ivins, 62, a biodefense researcher who spent years working on a better anthrax vaccine, overdosed on Tylenol and Codiene in 2008, after learning that the FBI was preparing to indict him on murder charges.
But I don't think it's somebody insane. And I think there are people within our government - certainly from the source of it - who know where it came from. And these people may not have had anything to do with it, but they certainly know where it came from."
The first item involves the elemental analysis of the anthrax spores that was conducted by Dr. Joseph Michael, a materials scientist at Sandia National Laboratories. At the conference, Dr. Michael presented analyses of three anthrax letters (Leahy, Daschle, and New York Post). He concluded that the anthrax powder in the three letters shared a chemical fingerprint but did not match the chemical fingerprint of spores in Ivins’ flask. Spores from the letters showed a distinct chemical signature that included silicon, oxygen, iron, tin, and other elements. Spores from Ivins’ RMR-1029 flask did not contain those elements in quantities that matched the letter spores. This is not unusual considering that Ivins’ RMR-1029 preparation had been submerged in water and other chemicals since 1997 and was a mixture of 34 different spore preparations. The letter spores were dried spores, produced from two separate growth preparations as indicated by differences in the New York and Washington, D.C. mailings. Although the chemical fingerprint of the spores is interesting, given the variability involved in the growth process, it was not relevant to the investigation.
More than eight years later, there are many critics who do not agree with the FBI's conclusions.
One is Norman Covert, public affairs officer and historian at Fort Detrick from 1977 to 1999, who wrote a column, "White Powder and 007" in 2008. Asked by Asia Times Online if this 2008 column needed updating in light of the FBI's release, Covert said: "With the FBI's latest decision, my words are still apropos."
Here is an excerpt [6]:
# The government mobilized its team of Double-oh (uh-oh!) secret agents seven years ago to identify a villainous mad scientist, who, without genuine motive or opportunity, single handedly: Used a Bio-Containment Level Three lab suite at Fort Detrick's US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), to develop a highly bred, weapons-grade strain of Bacillus anthracis (a scientific achievement not accomplished before, except perhaps in the biological warfare laboratories of the former Soviet Union);
# Manipulated this super bacillus with a silica coating and a slight electrical charge so that, when opened in the containment cabinet, each particle repelled others in a brilliant display;
# Ensured each particle was no more than five microns in size so that it would penetrate the fabric of a normal No 10 paper envelope, a product sold by the US Postal Service in the District of Columbia, Northern Virginia, West Virginia and Central Maryland;
Managed to remove the material from the laboratory with it already placed in at least one envelope, also likely encased in an impermeable container, which would be obscured from the security guard;
# Managed to avoid leaving any evidence on his clothing, his two automobiles and van, his house, garage, office and other personal items despite the extremely "dirty" potential of the dry agent;
# Managed, in a fashion unknown to the Department of Homeland Security and the "Double-Ohs", to have the envelopes placed in a mailbox in Princeton, NJ, with a note in a handwriting that cannot be identified with any known person;
# Managed to obscure this cutting-edge science from a host of colleagues for the entire development period - a major feat in itself!
# Simultaneously he managed to significantly improve an old anthrax vaccine to protect our troops during Operation Desert Storm; then was a key developer of the new recombinant DNA-based anthrax vaccine that was undergoing efficacy trials at USAMRIID.
Her recent critique of the FBI report includes these four following elements:
# The FBI's Summary states that "only a limited number of individuals ever had access to this specific spore preparation" and that the flask was under Ivins' sole and exclusive control. Yet the body of the report acknowledges hundreds of people who had access to the spores, and questions remain about the location of the spore prep during the period in question;
# The FBI says that only a small number of labs had Ames anthrax, including only three foreign labs. Yet a quick Pub Med search of papers published between 1999 and 2004 revealed Ames anthrax was studied in at least Italy, France, the UK, Israel and South Korea as well as in the US. By failing to identify all labs with access to Ames, the FBI managed to exclude potential domestic and foreign perpetrators;
# The FBI claims that "drying anthrax is expressly forbidden by various treaties", therefore it would have to be performed clandestinely. Actually, the US government sponsored several programs that dried anthrax spores. Drying spores is not explicitly prohibited by the Biological Weapons Convention, though many would like it to be;
# The FBI report claims the anthrax letters envelopes were sold in Frederick [Maryland]. Later it admits that millions of indistinguishable envelopes were made, with sales in Maryland and Virginia." [8]
I attended the "biodefense meeting" of Feb. 24 in Baltimore. One thing we are reminded of is this: The entire scientific investigation has been focused upon looking for a match between the attack anthrax and the samples of Ames strain anthrax that were collected about seven years ago, numbering 1070 samples. According to the FBI scientists, these samples were collected as the result of an FBI request for "voluntary submissions" of Ames strain samples made to laboratories all over the world (with the greatest majority of course being American laboratories). The scientists spoke to us on Feb. 24 about all of the expensive and time-consuming rigor that went into producing results that would be admissible in a court of law. What renders all of it inadmissible is the (tacit) underlying assumption that the laboratory that generated the attack anthrax would produce a sample of the same anthrax in response to an FBI request for "voluntary submissions." Some subpoenas were issued. This of course does not dispose of the problem. A subpoena is a piece of paper that commands the production of evidence within a certain period, like one month. There is hardly more reason to believe that the laboratory that generated the attack anthrax would produce a sample of it in response to a subpoena than it would in response to a request for voluntary submission. As for unannounced searches and seizures, I expect there were a few of those. For this to add to the validity of the science, one underlying assumption is that one of these unannounced searches would have occurred at the guilty laboratory. The other assumption is that the guilty laboratory would have left laying around a batch of anthrax matching the attack anthrax. The "underlying assumptions" I am identifying are not just insupportable. What is being assumed to be true is almost certainly false. There is every reason to expect that immediately after perpetrating the anthrax attacks, the guilty parties hid/disposed of the anthrax remaining in their custody that could connect them to the crime. This would be especially easy to do in a facility shrouded in layers of secrecy. The FBI might as well have asked for everyone's samples of dried Ames strain, concentrated to the degree of one trillion spores per gram, containing particles between 1 and 4 microns in size, with the presence of silicon in the spore coat,etc. Bottom line: The FBI's claim is erroneous that the science behind Amerithrax narrows the possible sources of the attack anthrax to eight labs (seven of which were at USAMRIID, and one of which was at an "institution" the FBI continues to refuse to identify). The science behind Amerithrax is being used by the DOJ-FBI to imbue groundless conclusions with the aura of scientific authority and precision. The science is also being used to occupy (distract, confuse) us with esoteric matters that cannot contribute to real insight into the origin of the anthrax letters.
When you add some two dozen dead scientists and engineers who had worked on the Strategic Defense Initiative “Star Wars” program to the 80 some odd dead microbiologists, you end up with more than 100 dead specialists all involved in our most Top-Secret projects.
To me this goes beyond mere chance as I am certain any insurance actuary would confirm. What I fear is that some hidden non-governmental power desires to make use of our most exotic technologies and does not want to worry about some scientist or engineer with a conscience coming forward to alert the public as to what is happening.
The evidence for the human fabrication of the AIDS virus is quite compelling, if not overwhelming. Yet this news has been smothered by conflicting accounts and theories presented in the corporate-controlled mass media.
Picture what would happen if a sudden outbreak of contagion such as Bird Flu began to decimate whole populations and someone stepped forward to reveal that it had originated in some government lab. Or what if “alien” spaceships suddenly appeared in the skies and someone got on CNN and revealed that he or she had worked on holograph technology for the government? To effectively control a previously-secret technology, you would have to get rid of any loose ends that might reveal its true origins.
Jim Marrs
Originally posted by MaxBlack
There are those that will not remember the Anthrax attacks and I hope to provide some background and some links that will assist those in understanding why an Anthrax attack occurred in the first place. Many have stated that the Anthrax attacks were separate from the 911 operation . . . . . . . . . .
Strangely, perhaps, Jerome Hauer managed the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. The anthrax used in the attacks was identified as an Ames strain, which means it had to have come from the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) at Fort Detrick, Maryland.
Jerome Hauer received relatively good information for tracking down the origin of the anthrax. He even got a list of people from various institutes, including USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. But his response was slow and hidden behind a public relations campaign spreading Orwellian claims like "Suspects are Osama bin Laden and his Al-Q'aeda network and sympathizers to US right wing extremists".
Why would he act so slowly, and in such an inappropriate fashion? Perhaps because Jerome Hauer knew someone whose name was on that list?
Stephen Hatfill, at one time considered a prime suspect in this still-unsolved case, had worked for USAMRIID at Fort Detrick. Strangely, perhaps, he had also worked with Jerome Hauer, for Scientific Applications International Corporation, at the Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis.
source
BRIODY: There are a number of transactions that the company profited from directly following the Sept. 11 attacks. The most important one was the fact that they were able to take United Defense, their crown jewel of defense holdings public shortly after the attacks. In fact, in the prospectus that they circulated, before that IPO, they cited the Sept. 11 attacks as one of the reasons why they were able to sell public stock in this company at this time. So that was all on the back of the defense build-up following Sept. 11.
There are also a number of other holdings of theirs -- like at that time, they owned a company called the IT Group, which is a company that cleans up hazardous materials and won a very lucrative contract to clean up the Hart Senate Building in Washington, D.C., which had been tainted by anthrax.
They also own a company called U.S. Investigative Services, USIS, which is a company that does background checks and provides varying levels of security clearance for different government employees, airline employees – things like that. Obviously their contracts went through the roof after Sept. 11.
In addition to that, they own companies that do all kinds of security, different aerospace companies. So whenever there’s a big defense buildup, those companies profit. So there are a number of ways that they’ve profited very handsomely from Sept. 11.