Proof that Ivins Couldn’t Have Done It (At Least Not Alone)

George Washington’s Blog
Sunday, Aug 10, 2008

According to the FBI, Ivins made the killer anthrax in his lab at Fort Detrick all by himself in something like 12 hours (pages 8-9).

Is that plausible?

Well, one of the handful of people who actually can produce the kind of high-tech weaponized anthrax used in the attacks said:

“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.”

In addition, scientists at Ft. Detrick say that no one there had the equipment or knowledge to make weaponized anthrax of the type used in the letters (more on this in a later esasy).

If it would take one of the handful of people who have the know-how and a good lab with staff a year, and if no one at Ivins’ lab knew how to do it, how could Ivins have made it all by himself in 12 hours without the proper equipment?

• 
• Social bookmarks
• 
• Email this article
• 
• Print this page

Comment Terms Of Use

4 Responses to “Proof that Ivins Couldn’t Have Done It (At Least Not Alone)”

1. Neo Bagration Says:
   August 10th, 2008 at 7:01 am

   Local police cover up their totalitarian police state actions by Price George’s County SWAT team.

   http://www.cnn.com/video/?/vid......raid.wjla

   Got police state?

   YES! The Labrador Retriever’s were a threat to the police? There’s no such thing as a no knock warrant in Maryland? So just kick in our doors whenever you want, shot our dogs, and threaten to kill us?

2. Great199 Says:
   August 10th, 2008 at 7:11 am

   Sounds like another false flag attack to me. One of those good old these 19 arabs did it and we found out within 72 hours of the attack oh and by the way they are cave dwellers. Oh and 8 of them are alive but we wont change our story kind of lines. This was obviously a government sponsored attack.

3. jimd3100 Says:
   August 10th, 2008 at 7:47 am

   Dr Irvins collegues and co workers are on the record as being very skeptical that he was the anthrax killer. Here are just a few from one article there are several more…..

   “Bruce Ivins’s colleagues allege that, armed with this evidence, the FBI began to pressure the people at the laboratory and singled out Ivins because he was most susceptible to being intimidated.”

   “Dr. W. Russell Byrne said that FBI harassed Ivins’s daughter repeatedly to acknowledge that her father was involved in the attacks, showing her gruesome photographs of victims of the anthrax letters and telling her that Ivins was responsible. They also tried to “bribe” his adopted son by suggesting that he might be able to collect the $2.5 million reward for solving the case and buy a sports car.”

   “Another Ivins colleague, Dr. Kenneth W. Hedlund, backed Byrne’s allegations and said that the FBI scapegoated Ivins because they thought he was the weakest one in the team and they needed to find somebody to blame for the unsolved attacks. Yet another scientist, David R. Franz, said that it is highly unlikely, very improbable, that Bruce Ivins could have manufactured the anthrax powder at the government facility without being noticed.”

   “Most of Ivins’ co-workers testified that they did not notice anything amiss in Bruce Ivins’ behavior before his mental health began deteriorating following the recent investigation. He would apparently weep at his desk, and was unable to do his work.”
   http://www.efluxmedia.com/news.....21582.html

   But there is somebody that had this to say about Irvins…..
   “That’s bull—-,” said one former senior USAMRIID official. “If there’s contamination, you always reswab. And you would remember doing it.”

   “The former official told The Times that Ivins might have hedged regarding reswabbing out of fear that investigators would find more of the spores inside or near his office.”
   http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....4223.story

   Notice his name is not mentioned but that he was a “former senior USAMRIID official”.

   Remember when Brian Ross senior investigative reporter for ABC News reported that he had several well placed sources that were “in a position to know” that claimed the anthrax was coated with bentonite, which proved that the anthrax was from Iraq? Well, if a reporter wanted to confirm this wouldn’t a person “in a position to know” be a senior USAMRIID official, since that was where the anthrax was being analyzied? Well, this is for sure….a senior official at USAMRIID would know the report was wrong wouldn’t he? Did this official say anything at the time like that? And here we have an official that clearly doesn’t mind talking to reporters as long as his name isn’t mentioned.

   Which is why Brian Ross and his reputation should be forever smeared unless and until he names his sources, for lieing to him and the American people.

4. Gerald Says:
   August 10th, 2008 at 10:26 pm

   Has anyone given any thought to the fact that the company that stood to benefit from the anthrax scare was Bayer. They had the antidote and were closing the factory that made it, as the patent expired. In view of the alarm, the German government got them to keep the plant open and offered patent protection

   Given that the share price of Bayer was in free fall after the failure of their statin drug, which they had to remove from the market because it was lethal, and were facing a large number of lawsuits on account of it, the anthrax scare came just at the right time.

   Since they had the antidote, they must have had specimens of anthrax to test. So the suspects in the case ought to include them. They had a motive. Ivens did not.