The Killer Anthrax Did Not Even Originate at Fort Detrick

George Washington’s Blog
Friday, Aug 8, 2008

It is clear that hundreds of people had access to the specific “RMR-1029″ batch of anthrax stored at Fort Detrick (where Dr. Ivins worked) and used in the anthrax attacks.

What is less well known is that the anthrax was probably not manufactured by Ivins or Fort Detrick. Instead, it probably came from the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah:

“Called RMR-1029, it was also referred to by Ivins as “Dugway Ames spores – 1997,” apparently from its original point of manufacture, at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, an Army biodefense center administered by a company called Battelle.”

Scores of scientists work at Dugway Proving Ground, and the Army Reserve, National Guard and Air Force also operate there:

In addition, Dugway’s mission is to test US and Allied biological and chemical weapon defense systems in a secure and isolated environment. DPG also serves as a facility for US Army Reserve and US National Guard maneuver training, and US Air Force flight tests. DPG is controlled by the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command (ATEC).

(Article continues below)

Given that RMR-1029 likely originated at Dugway Proving Ground, isn’t it likely that the originator of the sample kept a sample himself?

And given that many hundreds of people from various branches of the military work at Dugway, isn’t it possible that one of them could have stolen some of the sample? Obviously, biological agents would have been kept under security. However, my point is that this was not solely a bioweapon facility, but also a military base. High-level brass could have authorized entry for others, or someone who worked at the lab could have been bribed.

Indeed, like Dr. Philip Zack – a Fort Detrick scientist who gained access to the anthrax lab even though he no longer worked there – someone could have talked their way into the Dugway bioweapons lab.

Update: The New York Times states:

“The attack strain contained bacteria with both the flipped and the unflipped DNA, showing that it was a mixture of two strains, which analysts later found reflected a mix of origins — 85 percent from the Dugway Proving Ground of the Army in Utah and 15 percent added at Fort Detrick, according to one person close to the investigation.”

This confirms that Dugway was the origin of the bulk of the anthrax. The “normal” Ft. Detrick Ames strain was fairly common before 9/11, so many people could have obtained samples and mixed them into the Dugway strain.

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

Comment Terms Of Use

8 Responses to “The Killer Anthrax Did Not Even Originate at Fort Detrick”

1. Hologram5 Says:
   August 8th, 2008 at 5:14 am

   Can you say cover-up and frame job?

2. jimd3100 Says:
   August 8th, 2008 at 9:45 am

   It came from Dugway Proving Ground and was made before 9/11.

   “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.”
   http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....ge=printer

   “For nearly a decade, U.S. Army scientists at Dugway Proving Ground in Utah have made small quantities of weapons-grade anthrax that is virtually identical to the powdery spores used in the mail attacks that have killed five people, government sources say.”
   http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bio.....pores.html

   “Dugway’s Life Sciences Division makes the deadly spores in far, far smaller quantities, rarely accumulating more than 10 grams at a time, according to one Army official.”
   http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bio.....pores.html

   “It has been estimated that the perpetrator used a total of about 10g in the letters.”
   http://911review.org/Wget/www......report.htm

3. Mizuninktub Says:
   February 9th, 2009 at 7:02 am

   QTYvF5fA7TAN prozac http://proyh.siteboard.de/ prozac and diabetes

4. esticesig Says:
   February 9th, 2009 at 8:11 am

   L5xGY flagyl
   about iv flagyl

5. Spozynokysymn Says:
   February 9th, 2009 at 9:21 am

   eFz5E5pPrRU2Jv atenolol
   any interaction between tums and atenolol
   RKY52mMvbSTk

6. artefunlafe Says:
   February 9th, 2009 at 11:09 am

   uML6MF9 lorazepam
   lorazepam recommended dosage

7. KapeSlave Says:
   February 10th, 2009 at 1:09 am

   wzpXnnlbWQOR lexapro
   lexapro verses zoloft

8. FarUnpaPapasp Says:
   February 10th, 2009 at 6:03 am

   2ZIsdFyIQRpK prevacid
   prevacid and epilepsy