Anthrax

I discussed this a little last week, but I want to continue the discussion. To review: Bruce E. Ivins, the very scientist who was being used by the government to analyze the anthrax laden powder turned out to be the number on suspect in the anthrax terror plot. Bruce Ivins committed suicide last week, reportedly overdosing with Tylenol with Codeine. It is not easy to overdose on Tylenol with Codeine. In fact, the codeine probably was incidental. Tylenol itself will destroy your liver if you take a large overdose. Is this what he did? If so, he would have died slowly and in agony. I don't see him choosing that way out.

Why has it taken so long to focus in on Ivins? Why did the government spend so much time investigating Steven Hatfill, the man they hounded as "Dr. Anthrax" who turned out so obviously innocent that the government had to pay out $5.82 million in a legal settlement, an almost unheard of development.

Over at Daily Kos it has been pointed out that Ivins WAS viewed as a suspect way back in 2001, and this was written about by none other than FOX NEWS. From that 2001 Fox News article:

... in an e-mail obtained by FOX News, scientists at Fort Detrick openly discussed how the anthrax powder they were asked to analyze after the attacks was nearly identical to that made by one of their colleagues.

"Then he said he had to look at a lot of samples that the FBI had prepared ... to duplicate the letter material," the e-mail reads. "Then the bombshell. He said that the best duplication of the material was the stuff made by [name redacted]. He said that it was almost exactly the same ... his knees got shaky and he sputtered, 'But I told the General we didn't make spore powder!'"

Why did it take so long? ABC News was desperately trying to help the government pin the blame on Iraq, an absurd assertion, as Glen Greenwald discussed last week in his very extensive analysis.

To quote Greenwald:

Much more important than the general attempt to link the anthrax to Islamic terrorists, there was a specific intent -- indispensably aided by ABC News -- to link the anthrax attacks to Iraq and Saddam Hussein. In my view, and I've written about this several times and in great detail to no avail, the role played by ABC News in this episode is the single greatest, unresolved media scandal of this decade. News of Ivins' suicide, which means (presumably) that the anthrax attacks originated from Ft. Detrick, adds critical new facts and heightens how scandalous ABC News' conduct continues to be in this matter.

Was this desperation to find an excuse to invade Iraq (aided and abetted by ABC) the reason attention was diverted from Ivins? Did Ivins himself (as the man who was helping to analyze the anthrax laden powder) try to frame Hatfill? Isn't it strange that Fox News may have had it right, yet later was willing to jump on the invade Iraq bandwagon?

What if it had been George Bush who had been targeted instead of journalists and Democratic Congressmen? Would the government investigation have been better? Funny how the investigation into attacks on journalists and Democrats gets bungled for years and misused as an excuse to invade Iraq. What if it HAD been someone outside the government establishment, someone with an ethnic name? Don't you think the investigation would have been far more aggressive?

Another Daily Kos article compared two terrorst investigations, that of Dr. Ivins and that of Jose Pedilla. To quote:

We have in Mr. Padilla a man merely accused of preliminarily plotting something that by all accounts he never had the capacity to accomplish by any flight of fancy... subsequently wrongfully imprisoned and tortured for over six years.

If the FBI is to be believed, Dr. Ivins not only plotted but actually succeeded in killing five people and terrorizing an entire nation. Granted, it can be argued that they wound up spending about $6 million in recompense to the wrong guy, Dr. Hatfill, whom they chased for four years... but, again, if they are to be believed, they've been hot on the trail of Dr. Ivins for the last 18 months. Accounts from Dr. Ivins neighbors confirm that the "black SUVs" were well-known in the neighborhood for quite some time.

In summary, here's the irony, or massive cognitive dissonance, if you will:
Lightweight, inept plotter is swept up and tortured for six years; highly intelligent, successful mass murderer is closely observed for 18 months and subsequently commits suicide.

What if the government scientist had been named Pedilla and had darker skin? Was racism involved? Or was it simply that Ivins had better resources to defend himself? Or was there a deep need to cover up the involvement of a US government scientist in the number one bioterrorist attack to date?

Finally, why is the FBI so eager to drop the investigation now that Ivins is dead. As reported in Daily Kos, this is absurd. On Kos they quote Dr. Alan Pearson, the Director of the Biological and Chemical Weapons Control Program at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation:

"The FBI must not let the death of Bruce Ivins deter it from completing a full and thorough investigation of the attacks," said Pearson. "The chance to prove Ivins' guilt before a court of law has been lost, but the need for a thorough investigation and a full accounting to the American people remains." CNN reported today that the FBI will soon close the case "because a threat no longer exists."

Pearson says that the number one question still to determine is whether Ivins was responsible for the attacks and, if so, whether he acted alone and with complete secrecy. "If Ivins was indeed responsible for the attacks, did he have any assistance? Did anyone else at the Army lab or elsewhere have any knowledge of his activities prior to, during, or shortly after the anthrax attacks?" questioned Pearson. "The FBI must see this investigation through to completion."

...

"It appears increasingly likely that the only significant bioterrorism attack in history may have originated from right within the biodefense program of our own country," said Pearson. "The implications for our understanding of the bioterrorism threat and for our entire biodefense strategy and enterprise are potentially profound."

We tried blaming Iraq, but the attack came from within our own biodefense program, our own country, our own government. And that same government has bungled the investigation from the start, partly in its eagerness to blame Iraq as an excuse to investigate. And that same government is now ready to drop the investigation now that the number one suspect has committed suicide, reportedly in a rather unusual, unlikely manner. I am not conspiracy theorist, but what the hell can we think? There clearly is a great deal that has remained hidden and that the government continues to want to hide. I believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. I believe that al-Qaeda carried out 9/11 without complicity from the Bush Administration (though I do blame the Bush Administration for incompetence in the matter). What am I to believe about the Anthrax attacks that came from within our government, targeting journalists and Democrats and which were used to bolster the many lame excuses for invading Iraq? A cover up seems clear. What is behind that cover up is beyond me for now.