« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Ivins' Strain Of Anthrax Was Not So Rare After All
Remember, at the beginning of the week, when the New York Times reported that "at least 10 people" had access to that critical flask of anthrax linking Dr. Bruce Ivins to the 2001 anthrax attacks?
At the time, we thought that was really significant. Ten people? How did the FBI eliminate the other nine people as suspects to know Ivins was the guilty one?
But then on Thursday, the Wall Street Journal reported that the number of people with access to that anthrax was much higher.
In addition, more than 100 people had access to the anthrax in question, a larger number than many had previously believed.
Now today, the Washington Post reports that the flask in Ivins' lab was not the only one containing that particular strain matched to the 2001 letters.
FBI officials said the powdered bacteria mailed to news outlets and Senate offices had a distinct genetic heritage that precisely matched anthrax spores Ivins kept in a flask in his laboratory. But the officials also acknowledged that 15 other labs had the same strain, known as RMR-1029.At this rate, by the end of next week, we'll find out that this strain of anthrax is typically found in most 10th-grade science labs.
Advertisement
Josh
Zachary
Circumstantial... allegations... points to. Let every American lament the suicide of Dr. Bruce Ivins, who was chosen as the innocent sacrificial lamb to pacify our hunger for a justice perverted by revenge and fear.
Shame on the prosecuters and investigators who become so blinded by their need to appear effective they'll destroy someone's, anyone's, life. Innocent until proven guilty. I hope the next case isn't you or me.
August 8, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, across the pond, they're seeing sunlight
through all the holes in the FBI's shoddy anthrax investigation. It seems we've screamed our degradation to the world: In case you didn't notice in the run-up to the Iraq War, we don't really need evidence to destroy another country, or convict any damn person of any damn crime we want.
After the hullaballoo'd "evidence" release earlier this week, it's become clear there's no real evidence linking Ivins with the 2001 anthrax attacks. The only actual "proof" the FBI has proffered of his guilt is his suicide last week. That's it. That's all. He killed himself - and that proves he's guilty.
The only thing it proves is that the FBI and this endlessly corrupt Administration think we're as dumb as stumps.
August 8, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also in the WAPO article, the info that Ivins took administrative leave on Sept 17 2001. Well, they could have mentioned that before!
Why on earth wouldn't the FBI come right out and say at the outset that Ivins TOOK THE DAY OFF on the day the letters were probably mailed.
Here in the reality-based community (known in some circles as the department of tinfoil hats) I am starting to wonder if the FBI botched these information releases so they could collect e-mail addresses of people who would have the good sense to complain, and put them on a list of people to watch closely in future.
August 8, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's more likely is that evidence - like credit card and ATM receipts - points to Ivins being nowhere near Princeton during the hours he took off Sept. 17, 2001. That hours-long administrative leave (not the entire day) is among the very few bits of evidence in this case that can even be called "circumstantial." Ivins is being posthumously convicted with innuendo - nothing more. And, no, the tin-foil hat brigade says 9/11 was a controlled demolition and Kennedy was assassinated in a supernaturally efficient conspiracy that involved every national institution up to and including the Rotary Club. On the other hand, there are legitimate inconsistencies in the latest FBI "revelations" about the anthrax attacks. So far, the case made against him would be laughed out of court.
August 11, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
And they are even counting Dick Cheney . . .
August 8, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Google "Dr David S Irwin" this week?
The hipsters at Google must be taking their marching orders from the FBI. All info about Irwin has been blocked with the exception of his office address (Gaithersburg MD), his medical school (Case Western) and his affiliation with Shady Grove Adventist Hospital.
Earlier in the week, a website disclosed that Dr Irwin did his residency at Walter Reed and Lettermen but that info seems to have disappeared into cyberspace.
The fact that the FBI used Irwin's name and reputation to publicly bolster its case against Dr Bruce Ivins in court apparently doesn't matter to Google censors.
It is only a matter of time before Google crosses the line (if it hasn't already) between cooperating with government demands for censorship and actively participating in disinformation campaigns.
I recently read that Google is now a defense contractor.
We are so screwed.
August 8, 2008 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do you know the items have been blocked? I looked David Irwin the day the story broke and I don't recall there's a lot less coming up in search now.
He may have removed some voluntary profiles of his own accord.
I am curious about your basis here.
August 9, 2008 1:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
When Duley's statement to the court became public, there were dozens of Google entries highlighting the phrase "David Irwin, his psychiatrist, called him a homicidal sociopath."
If you just google "Dr David S. Irwin", those entries are gone.
Googling "Dr David S Irwin Bruce Ivins" links to some comments about the case but doesn't provide any new info.
At least one physician profile website initially disclosed that Irwin did his residency at Walter Reed and Letterman which are military facilities but the info was deleted some time during the week. I have a before and after screenshot of the site.
Another physician profile site specifically warns the user that information about Irwin is limited so don't bother buying the background check.
From what I can gather, Dr David S Irwin was named a top DC doc in 2005, 2006, 2008 and maybe 2007 by the Washingtonian, a monthly magazine. A fair number of people in DC must know who he is and why he is a top doc but there is not one word in Google about Mr. Popularity receiving any awards, attending any social or professional functions or doing anything else newsworthy in the thirty eight years or so he has been in practice in the DC area.
After I commented here about Google censorship, I did notice that Google crosslinked to a MSN entry which provides the name of a psychiatrist who apparently shares an office with Irwin. She is professionally associated with the U. of Maryland.
Dr. Irwin and at least three other psychiatrists are affiliated with Shady Grove Hospital even though Shady Grove doesn't have a psychiatric facility, according to its website. However, the hospital's 20-year master building plan calls for "Psychiatric Hospital redevelopment".
I am surprised at the lack of interest online in Duley's employer, Dr. Allen L. Levy, and his role in the Ivins investigation. Levy worked at the VA Hospital in Martinsburg, West Virginia for several years.
Levy's wife, Wendy A. Levy, has been a licensed therapist since 2001 and may have supervised Duley or partnered with her in group sessions when Ivins was a patient.
I am also surprised at how few people have considered the probable extent of the FBI's involvement in Ivins' psychiatric treatment. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that some special agents on the case signed up for group therapy earlier this year.
August 9, 2008 11:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am still not quite following. Could the problem be that most of the newspaper reports listed Irwin's name as "Dr. David Irwin" rather than Dr. David S Irwin? If I google David Irwin homicidal, I find references for this quote.
I'm no Google expert--it would be interesting to hear why this happened if it happened. I know Google prides itself on providing results that closely match a query. Perhaps the large number of queries of Dr. Irwin's name in both formats somehow separated the references? (i.e. the google search engine came to see David Irwin and David S Irwin as 2 separate queries?
(Without knowing much about Dr. Irwin's connection, I can only say that if I were in his situation & someone had divulged privileged conversation with such disastrous results, I'd be trying to get information about me pulled off the web as well.)
August 10, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am so Not a weigher of evidence. But it does seem that this Mr. Dr.Ivins anthrax scientist was way suspicious. I mean, it looks like he did do the crimes. When you take a sober look. Not that I'm some sobriety advocate.
The FBI (Famous But Incompetent?) in a utopia ideal place maybe could have done a better job. But there's heaps of evidence against this Mr. Dr.Ivins.
And I think his creepy nursery rhyme thingies about two Dr. Ivins running around in his head puts him into, like, the zone of people who sure could have done some heinosity like this.
August 8, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing I find amazing is that Dr. Bruce Ivins was employed by a well-respected lab. Given the fact that they handle very top secret tests etc., wouldn't you think they'd do psychological testing on it's employees periodically? If they did, Why Was He Kept On? If they don't, Why Not?
I wouldn't be surprised if someday the real truth comes out and we find it was all a set up for Dr. Ivins.
August 9, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right.
As my neighbor put it: why didn't they throw his butt in Gitmo to get him out of the lab if they were so convinced of his guilt? Especially if they were on to him for several years like they made it sound.
August 9, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't believe that Amy Silverman's major profile of McMajorShit published in the Phoenix New Times News on August 7th has sunk beneath the waves so quickly. It reads as being balanced and presents him in a DEVASTATING light. She has a longtime perspective on his career centering in Arizona and has covered his activities for nearly three decades from Phoenix. After reading it, one understands why the Nancy Reagan endorsement last month was such an ICY affair. Apparently, the lady in red loathes him. It was all political expediency.
Here's the link for anyone interested:
http://phoenixnewtimes.com/content/printVersion/848709
Please distribute widely!
August 10, 2008 12:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mrs. P and Erica:
I look up doctors all day long, for a living. Having a resume containing a staff position for a hospital which doesn't even have that discipline..is extremely creepy.
There is so much history that predates Amerithrax, and all of it has directly to do with Amerithrax. Its wonderful that you are on the right track, Mrs. P.
I want to correct a terrible FBI misstatement. Dr. Ivins was vaccinated several weeks before the second round of anthrax mailings: there were three rounds (although the first round may have included home delivery.) Immunity to anthrax develops frustratingly slowly, over a 5 month period of time. Unfortunately, from what I understand, immunity from immunization is lost after several years. Further, and very importantly, immunization would not offer comprehensive protection from inhalational anthrax: Ivins would have become terribly ill and probably would have died. An immunization two weeks before exposure to anthrax would have given Ivins no protection whatsoever.
There are reasons why inhalational anthrax is such a very different illness from cutaneous anthrax.
HOWEVER, if Ivins thought HE was at risk of being attacked, he may have hoped that his immunity would build over the course of several months from his immunization. THIS IS A VERY CRUCIAL LOGICAL THREAD in the Amerithrax investigation.Ivins would have known that a shot on Tuesday couldn't protect him on Thursday...he was an expert on vaccines!!!!!
From start to finish, over the course of many years, I think we are looking for a serial poisoner(s) (either personally or professionally motivated) whose path(s) intertwined with the CIA and with al qaeda. A poisoner who apparently got others to do his work for him.... a poisoner who then poisoned the attacker to cover it up.
The medications Ivins was put on don't mix at all well. With alcohol, a nightmare. Just who was responsible for case management? Well, evidently, conveniently, no one. Ivins was involved in a study. Let that be a warning to the medically adventurous!
I like the idea that the mail sorting machines roughed up the anthrax and made it more easily inhaled. But I think more people would have become ill, than did. And the string of automobiles devoid of anthrax spores....not at all believable.
And I am more firmly believing, each day, that Bob Stevens took the un-found anthrax letter with him on vacation. I have heard now....all the evidence the FBI is willing to disclose. And it not only does not convince me, it hardens my resolve to believe in more apparent, rational explanations.
Most people in the US speculate about the attacks, without much involvement. On September 13, 2001 I opened my mailbox to find a single white legal-sized envelope. Not much like the ones that followed it. But the address was in the same block-print style.
The FBI was never, apparently interested.
August 30, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink