Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
vigilant wrote:Nordic wrote:
I like how absolutely no motive is mentioned.
When I read it I thought they gave us motive right off the bat when they threw this out there in the second sentence.
Bruce E. Ivins, 62, who for the past 18 years worked at the government's elite biodefense research laboratories at Fort Detrick, Md., had been informed of the impending prosecution, people familiar with Ivins, his suspicious death and with the FBI investigation said.
It appears that the pitch of the article is that his stress of being under suspicion, or having potentially been guilty was enough to cause him to commit suicide.
Actually it appears as if the the article was fashioned in a manner that "rushes" to make this statement. I think the article either "does" paint the appearance of a guilty man killing himself before he is discovered, or the article "attempts" to falsely plant that scenario into the mind of the reader. Whichever it may be...
I also say: WTF? He's a top biodefense researcher, and Tylenol with codeine was his poison of choice?
JackRiddler wrote:Last few minutes, about 2 hrs 34 minutes into video at
rtsp://video1.c-span.org/15days/e070908_mukasey.rm
Transcript & commentary from
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/ ... terrorist/emptywheel of firedoglake wrote:
Yeah, What ABOUT that Anthrax Terrorist?
By: emptywheel Thursday July 10, 2008 5:47 am 6
Call me crazy. But after viewing this very creepy exchange between Patrick Leahy and Michael Mukasey regarding the anthrax killer, I got the feeling that both of them know exactly who sent those anthrax-laden letters almost seven years ago.
Leahy uses the recent settlement between Hatfill and DOJ to raise the issue. As he raises it, he notes that he is privy to classified information about the anthrax killer, and because of that he has refrained from even discussing the case.
Leahy: I almost hate to get into the case of Steven Hatfill. I've refrained from discussing this, I've refused to discuss it with the press. I've told them some aspects of it I was aware of were classified so of course I could not discuss it but also, considering the fact that my life was threatened by an anthrax letter, two people died who touched a letter addressed to me I was supposed to open, I'm somewhat concerned.
What happened?
Mukasey: That case ...
Then Leahy makes s curious statement: we're paying Hatfill, which means that the guy who committed the crime is going free.
Leahy: We're paying Hatfill millions of dollars, the indication being the guy who committed the crime went free.
I'll let you sort through the logic of that sentence. But know that Mukasey doesn't like it--not at all.
Mukasey: Well, um, I don't understand, quote, the guy who committed the crime, unquote, to have gone free. What I do understand is...
Leahy: Nobody's been convicted.
Mukasey: Not yet.
Leahy: And five people are dead.
Mukasey: Yes, um...
Leahy: And hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent.
Eventually, it seems that Muaksey concedes that he, too, has very specific knowledge about the case.
Mukasey: That case is under active investigation and I need to be very careful about what I say.
Which Leahy seems to confirm. After all, if they didn't have very specific things to say to each other about the pursuit of the anthrax terrorist, then what good would a "private talk" about this be?
Leahy: We won't go any further. As I say, I feel somewhat reluctant because I was one of the targets. But I gotta say, what families of the people who died went through, what families of the people who were crippled went throug, even what my family went through. A lot of people are concerned and I won't say more because we are in open session but I think you and I probably should have a private talk about this sometime.
Mukasey: That's fine.
Leahy ends with a comment that may well be directed at Mukasey's unwillingness to prosecute Bush officials for torture, or may well be directed toward fraudsters who tamper with elections, or may well be directed at the contractors who are seemingly immune from prosecution in Iraq, or may well be directed at Turdblossom's involvement in the persecution of Don Siegelman.
Leahy: You're the one person, the one person, who has the final say the laws are going to apply to everybody in this nation.
But I can't help but wonder whether Leahy suspects the government doesn't think the laws against terrorism ought to apply to "guy who committed" the anthrax attacks.
During the last week of October, 2001, ABC News, led by Brian Ross, continuously trumpeted the claim as their top news story that government tests conducted on the anthrax -- tests conducted at Ft. Detrick -- revealed that the anthrax sent to Daschele contained the chemical additive known as bentonite. ABC News, including Peter Jennings, repeatedly claimed that the presence of bentonite in the anthrax was compelling evidence that Iraq was responsible for the attacks, since -- as ABC variously claimed -- bentonite "is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program" and "only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons."
ABC News' claim -- which they said came at first from "three well-placed but separate sources," followed by "four well-placed and separate sources" -- was completely false from the beginning. There never was any bentonite detected in the anthrax (a fact ABC News acknowledged for the first time in 2007 only as a result of my badgering them about this issue). It's critical to note that it isn't the case that preliminary tests really did detect bentonite and then subsequent tests found there was none. No tests ever found or even suggested the presence bentonite. The claim was just concocted from the start. It just never happened.
That means that ABC News' "four well-placed and separate sources" fed them information that was completely false -- false information that created a very significant link in the public mind between the anthrax attacks and Saddam Hussein. And look where -- according to Brian Ross' report on October 28, 2001 -- these tests were conducted:
And despite continued White House denials, four well-placed and separate sources have told ABC News that initial tests on the anthrax by the US Army at Fort Detrick, Maryland, have detected trace amounts of the chemical additives bentonite and silica.
Two days earlier, Ross went on ABC News' World News Tonight with Peter Jennings and, as the lead story, breathlessly reported:
The discovery of bentonite came in an urgent series of tests conducted at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and elsewhere.
Clearly, Ross' allegedly four separate sources had to have some specific knowledge of the tests conducted and, if they were really "well-placed," one would presume that meant they had some connection to the laboratory where the tests were conducted -- Ft. Detrick. That means that the same Government lab where the anthrax attacks themselves came from was the same place where the false reports originated that blamed those attacks on Iraq.
Clearly, Ross' allegedly four separate sources had to have some specific knowledge of the tests conducted and, if they were really "well-placed," one would presume that meant they had some connection to the laboratory where the tests were conducted -- Ft. Detrick. That means that the same Government lab where the anthrax attacks themselves came from was the same place where the false reports originated that blamed those attacks on Iraq.
chiggerbit wrote:
Here's an interesting interview with Irvins brother. Sounds like there's something wrong with him:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/200 ... uspect.cnn
Nordic wrote:oh good god I wasn't talking about his motive for suicide.
I was talking about his motive to send anthrax through the mail and kill people.
They sorta don't mention that.
And I certainly don't believe his suicide was for real. I mean, come on, how stupid do they think we are?
Here's what I think it's a classic case of:
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 182 guests