Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins slipped under the radar because of FBI obsession

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
mhatrw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 02:03 AM
Original message
Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins slipped under the radar because of FBI obsession
Edited on Fri Aug-15-08 02:57 AM by mhatrw
Source: LA Times

Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins slipped under the radar because of FBI obsession

For several years, FBI supervisors ordered agents to stay locked on Dr. Steven J. Hatfill, a former Army researcher who had never handled anthrax.
Records show agents overlooked a series of early clues pointing to Ivins as the source of the 2001 deadly anthrax mailings and that the investigation remained locked on a former Army researcher.

By David Willman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
August 15, 2008

WASHINGTON -- As federal authorities pursued the wrong suspect in the deadly anthrax mailings of 2001, they ignored or overlooked a series of early clues that pointed to Army scientist Bruce E. Ivins, a review of investigative records by the Los Angeles Times shows. Law enforcement documents unsealed by a federal judge last week, along with other materials reviewed by The Times, show that within a few months of the mailings, FBI leaders were positioned to know important details spotlighting Ivins, who killed himself last month and has now been identified as the government's prime suspect. The information available to investigators in those early months included:

* Security records generated by swipes of magnetized plastic access cards revealing that Ivins -- alone among the handful of anthrax researchers at Ft. Detrick, Md. -- had spent hours in a fortified "hot suite" during late nights and weekends leading up to and surrounding the mailings. The research suite is protected by a maze of controls designed to prevent the escape of deadly biological agents.

(HE WORKED LATE A FEW TIMES!)

* Genetic analysis by outside scientists published in May 2002 reporting that anthrax powder recovered from the mailings most likely came from Ft. Detrick or was grown from a sample that originated there.

(HE WAS ONE OF HUNDREDS WHO COULD HAVE GOTTEN AHOLD OF SOME OF THIS STUFF!)

"I would have felt very confident at the time that the top place to look was at Ft. Detrick," said Jonathan A. Eisen, a UC Davis biologist and former colleague of the scientists at the Institute for Genomic Research in Rockville, Md.

(HE WORKED AT A PLACE WHERE OTHER SUSPECTS WORKED!)

* Ivins, recruited to assist the FBI, had failed in February 2002 to provide an anthrax sample, known as RMR-1029, as requested by a bureau agent. The FBI did not obtain the RMR-1029 from within the Ft. Detrick laboratory complex where Ivins worked until two years later, when an agent took possession of a flask holding that material.

(HE DIDN'T READ THE FBI'S MIND!)

* An Army report revealing that Ivins had not told his Army superiors in December 2001 about a possible anthrax spill around his workstation that he had privately cleaned up. In sworn statements to an Army investigator in May 2002, Ivins conceded that he should have reported the matter immediately. His omission occurred when the FBI was beginning to question scientists who had worked at Ft. Detrick.

(HE WAS A BIT OF A NEAT FREAK IN HIS ANTHRAX LADEN WORKPLACE AFTER 9/11!)

Yet even when Ivins told the Army that he had erred, FBI officials continued to rely on him for scientific assistance in their investigation of the mailings. And for several more years, FBI supervisors ordered agents to stay locked on a different target, Dr. Steven J. Hatfill, a former Army researcher who had never handled anthrax.

(Please accept this burnt offering of our guilt, and in exchange please pretend not to notice that we have no case against Ivins whatsoever.)

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-anthrax15-2008aug15,0,4707256.story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. yeah ..., thats the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lligrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 04:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. So Once Again, We Are Asked To Believe They Are Inept
instead of complicit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
judasdisney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 04:51 AM
Response to Original message
3. Sophisticated Spin Doctoring: "Inept" masks "Complicit" and still gets the Lone Gunman framed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 05:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. It also completely begs the question of his guilt. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 06:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. Same supervisors who stopped agents look into computers before 9/11?
Hmmm. How could the system be so broken FROM THE TOP?

Could it be the TOP is broken, e.g. Bush, Cheney, et. al.?

Naw, sheesh, conspiracy theorist, tin-foil-hat-wearer, ...

Let us just thankfully blame the FBI for too much focus, too much tenacity, and

FORGET ABOUT WHO REALLY SENT THE ANTHRAX. (Neither Hatfil, nor Ivins.)

:sarcasm:Move along! Nothing more to see here!:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
6. "Just because we were wrong about Hatfill doesn't mean we are wrong about Ivins."
Edited on Fri Aug-15-08 11:42 AM by librechik
Judge us by our spin, not our actions!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-15-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Has the FBI ever been anything but a propaganda organ?
Seriously. The history of this organization and its close ties to Hollywood are interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC