Serious Doubt Cast on FBI’s Anthrax Case Against Bruce Ivins
February 16th, 2011Via: Salon:
From the start, it was obvious that the FBI’s case against Ivins was barely more persuasive than its case against Hatfill had been. The allegations were entirely circumstantial; there was no direct evidence tying Ivins to the mailings; and there were huge, glaring holes in both the FBI’s evidentiary and scientific claims. So dubious was the FBI’s case that even the nation’s most establishment media organs, which instinctively trust federal law enforcement agencies, expressed serious doubts and called for an independent investigation…
…
But yesterday, the National Academy panel released its findings, and it produced a very unpleasant surprise for the FBI (though it was entirely unsurprising for those following this case). As The New York Times put it in an article headlined “Expert Panel Is Critical of F.B.I. Work in Investigating Anthrax Letters”: “A review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s scientific work . . . concludes that the bureau overstated the strength of genetic analysis linking the mailed anthrax to a supply kept by Bruce E. Ivins”; while the panel noted that the genetic findings are “consistent” with the claim that Ivins mailed the letters and can “support” an association, the evidence is far from “definitive,” as the FBI had long suggested. The report, commissioned by the FBI, specifically concluded that “the scientific link between the letter material and [Ivins’] flask number RMR-1029 is not as conclusive as stated in the DOJ Investigative Summary.” This morning’s Washington Post article — headlined: “Anthrax report casts doubt on scientific evidence in FBI case against Bruce Ivins” — noted that “the report reignited a debate that has simmered among some scientists and others who have questioned the strength of the FBI’s evidence against Ivins.”
I don’t know what the truth of the matter is in this situation, but holy shit for Ivins. Right.
The false/suspect light cast on him. Cripe, what this guy had to bear all these years. I remember reading stories of the FBI shadowing him for years. Can he sue the the FBI for defamation of character. false incrimination, or WHATEVER? What justice is there for Ivins?
I don’t know. But it makes me wish for a Superhero – like a Batman, or Superman, or SOMEONE to take up the cause of all these “people yearning to be free” of the freaking U.S. investigators who make life a misery for the poor humans who are “convenient targets.”
I don’t know whether Ivins is guilty or not! I don’t. But to ut the spotlight on him like this since Nov 2001? There’s something wrong here. REally wrong.
I used to get the WSJ delivered every day. I still remember how strange it was that there was an article on 9/11/01 about bioterrorism. Anthrax I think. Do not recall exactly. But if I offered a $500 reward for someone finding that article, would it prove ONCE and for all that the U.S. press is in cahoots with the PTB?
I will do it.
meant to write put instead of ut.
Offer stands.
“They” suicided that guy