Top Leaderboard, Site wide
October 24, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


The Importance of Being Exceptional
Oil Boom Prompts U.S. to Push for Crude Exports






Truthdig Bazaar
The Evolution of God

The Evolution of God

By Robert Wright
$17.15

more items

 
Report

Terror From the Inside

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Aug 5, 2008
anthrax preparedness
AP photo / Kenneth Lambert

Members of a Marine Corps chemical-biological incident team demonstrate anthrax cleanup techniques in Washington, D.C., in October 2001.

By Robert Scheer

The terrorists find all sorts of reasons to hate us. On Tuesday came word that the deadliest biological assault on the United States may be linked to the rejection of the terror suspect by a Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority sister decades ago. That is offered as an explanation of why the accused U.S. Army bio-warfare scientist allegedly drove seven hours from his home to mail anthrax-laced letters from a mailbox near the sorority’s Princeton University office, according to the Associated Press.

What we learned last week, after the suicide of Bruce E. Ivins, was disquieting enough without the twisted love angle. If you can believe the recent leaks from the FBI on its most important unsolved crime—which killed five and sickened 17, immobilized the federal government and traumatized the nation—it was a clean-shaven, white, God-fearing Catholic guy who done it. Despite a government anxious to find yet another example of Islamic terrorism in the wake of 9/11, it quickly became clear to experts that the anthrax used in the only WMD attack on our nation was a sophisticated product traceable to our own biological weapons labs. This is not surprising, because the United States has long been a leader in this field.

Our ostensible reason for developing the world’s most sophisticated arsenal of deadly biological weapons is that the United States needs to learn how to prevent such attacks from deranged outsiders. Now we have yet another reminder that the enemy may be us, and that at least some of the folks who develop weapons like to find occasions to use them. In this case, the terrorist the FBI was about to charge with homicide was a nut case who nonetheless received the highest security clearance to work on the most dangerous of weapons deep within our own military-industrial complex.

This is yet another disappointment for those writing the basic Bush administration narrative in which the terrorist is always some Islamo-fascist guy. That’s the assigned role that Saddam Hussein failed at so miserably. Remember when New York Times reporter Judith Miller was breathlessly reporting every sighting of a rusting Iraqi RV as one of Hussein’s biological weapons labs to justify the invasion of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Gosh, how the military-industrial complex must miss the Soviet Union, which could be trusted to match us in the high-tech game of dispensing mass death.

Of course, our government, which has never disowned the right to build and use nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, has long insisted that we alone are to be trusted with the creation of those devilish devices. Others are judged either too irrational, evil or merely incompetent to be allowed WMD, whereas we alone, with the unique experience of having killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, pose no threat. That others might not see it our way, particularly after recent incidents, such as the missing nukes that crossed the United States on that errant B-52 flight, or the anthrax attack allegedly conducted by one of our top bio-weapons scientists, is understandable.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
The larger problem is that we no longer take the threat of WMD as seriously as we should. We focused on the nonexistent WMD in Iraq while ignoring the spread of nuclear technology from Pakistan to North Korea, Iran and Libya under the guidance of A.Q. Khan, father of Pakistan’s popularly revered “Islamic bomb.” As former CIA Director George Tenet wrote in his memoir, the Bush administration seized upon the WMD issue in Iraq only because it was convenient: “The United States did not go to war in Iraq solely because of WMD. In my view, I doubt it was even the principal cause. Yet it was the public face that was put on it.”

The public face of terrorism was a bearded Muslim armed with WMD. No wonder we were caught off guard when the only person to ever attack us with WMD turns out to be, apparently, an active congregant at St. John the Evangelist Church in Frederick, Md., and a highly trusted employee of the U.S. military.

Not that our sleuths weren’t forewarned. As Ivins’ therapist, social worker Jean Duley, reported to the Maryland District Court last month in a hearing to obtain a restraining order: “As far back as the year 2000, the respondent has actually attempted to murder several other people ... he is a revenge killer when he feels that he’s been slighted ...especially towards women. ... He has been forensically diagnosed by several top psychiatrists as a sociopathic, homicidal killer.”

In any case, he was one of us.


Robert Scheer is author of a new book, “The Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America.”

Click here to check out Robert Scheer’s book,
“The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street.”


Keep up with Robert Scheer’s latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more at www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer.



Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: McCain’s Race-Baiting Scoundrels

Next item: China’s Quest for Olympic Glory



New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, August 6, 2008 at 10:16 pm Link to this comment

Not that our sleuths weren’t forewarned. As Ivins’ therapist, social worker Jean Duley, reported to the Maryland District Court last month in a hearing to obtain a restraining order: “As far back as the year 2000, the respondent has actually attempted to murder several other people ... he is a revenge killer when he feels that he’s been slighted ...especially towards women. ... He has been forensically diagnosed by several top psychiatrists as a sociopathic, homicidal killer.”
——————————————————————————
This sounds so utterly preposterous! Ivins was diagnosed as a sociopathic, homicidal killer by several top psychiatrists as far back as the year 2000 who “tried to murder several people”, yet he was allowed to continue in his job for eight more years until he finally committed suicide? What?

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, August 6, 2008 at 10:00 pm Link to this comment

By cann4ing, August 6 at 3:39 pm #

It is critical that we not only defeat John McCain in November but that we press a President Obama to reopen the 9/11 investigation including the Anthrax issue.  The only true remedy to the cancer that has infected this nation the past eight years is to subject “everything” that has occurred while the WH was under the control of a criminal enterprise.
—————————————————————————
I second the motion. We will know how much “change we can believe in” Obama really offers when we see whether such investigations are allowed to take place.

Report this

By Stevem, August 6, 2008 at 9:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Greenwald mentions the Lake work, found at http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/. Seems more evidence based than most of the news stories.

Worth reading

Report this

By samosamo, August 6, 2008 at 9:42 pm Link to this comment

jackpine

‘One would think’

You know, it does sound eriely like fux news’ standard: ‘and somepeople say’, trigger that gets one ready to believe a pile of shit with no basis other than what is about to be laid out is fact and final, and here with ‘one would think’ appears to be an attempt to have one conditioning their mind to accept some premise as a way to think. I think better of Robert Scheer and less of our government and for trying to believe there is some validity left in our government I will watchfully wait to see what becomes because if it is a distraction from the truth, it should be bourne out sometime down the road and I can dogcuss our inept authoritarians or forget about it.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, August 6, 2008 at 9:38 pm Link to this comment

I think we should take the attitude than unless the FBI can give us a detailed trail from the flask of anthrax culture traced to Ivins to the weapons-grade powder that was in those envelopes. If they can show how he did it, OK. But it doesn’t sound like it. They are just going to say “case solved, the perp is dead, case closed”. I want an attack dog prosecutor on this case following up every lead!!

It’s a short distance from here to 9-11. I bet the same people were involved. Maybe not, but just let me have a real investigation. That’s all I ask.

Report this

By cann4ing, August 6, 2008 at 9:38 pm Link to this comment

SuzieKidder:  The word “theory” as a method of scientific study merely refers to “systematically organized knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, especially a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the natural behavior of a specified set of phenomena.” 

As used by the government and the corporate media, however, “conspiracy theorist” is a derogatory label exclusively intended to dismiss any and all who challenge “official reality.”  As O’Brien told Winston Smith in 1984 when the later was being tortured in Oceania’s Ministry of Love, only the “mentally deranged” challenge official reality.  No matter the flaws—the Warren Commission Report’s pristine bullet, a 9/11 Commission Report, heavily reliant upon evidence obtained by torture,  which fails to deal with let alone explain why WTC 7, which had not been struck by a plane, suddenly collapsed into its own footprint in the span of 8.7 seconds, or   baseless conspiracy speculations offered by media pundits to explain away mathematically impossible discrepancies between exit-poll data and the official count during the 2004 presidential election* as simply a Democratic Party scheme to rig the exit-polls rather than the official count—theories that support official reality are uncritically received, whereas anything that challenges official reality. 

*Steven Freeman, Ph.D., in “Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen?” reveals that during the 2004 election, in “ten of the eleven battleground states there was a shift—that is, the official count differed from the exit-poll results—and in all ten the shift favored Bush.”  The statistical odds of this occurring are one in 1,024.  The discrepancies were especially acute in the key battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida where the shifts in favor of Bush were 4.9%, 6.7% and 6.5%.  The odds against it were 660,000 to one, a virtual impossibility. 

No matter Dr. Freeman’s academic credentials or the science behind his analysis, Freeman’s account will not appear on CNN or CBS because it challenges official reality, making it a conspiracy theory.  In 21st Century Orwellian America, all conspiracy theories are insane.  One does not broadcast insanity.

Report this

By jackpine savage, August 6, 2008 at 8:26 pm Link to this comment

I am in no way competent enough on the issue to offer a theory of my own.  However, i highly doubt that we know anything close to the truth about this case.  (One would think that if a person wanted revenge on a woman or her sorority, he might try to poison her/them rather than Congress…but anytime a sentence begins with “One would think”, the author is presupposing a lot.)

Though Scheer’s premise is not backed up with a good example here, but it is still a solid premise.  Terrorist attacks are much more likely to be homegrown than foreign bred.  Take a long look around this country and tell me that you don’t see a lot of scary-crazy people.

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, August 6, 2008 at 8:12 pm Link to this comment

re: By cann4ing, August 6 at 3:39 pm:

The Greenwald piece at Salon is absolutely essential to any understanding of what is going on here. I’m flabbergasted that Truthdig neglects this.

Report this

By chuckie2u, August 6, 2008 at 6:34 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The key to this entire situation is found in the last paragraph. Jean Duley REPORTED the man to the COURTS and they did NOTHING. While th eman was intelligent and showed all outward signs of a GOOF GOVERNMENT employee he had MENTAL problems that were KNOWN and allowed to manifest. THERE lies the problem. The entire event could possibly been prevented had the COURTS taken action on this man. Unfortunately there are others walking around who will committ similar acts and nothing will be done until AFTER the tragedy. So much for our enlightened COURT SYSTEM.

Report this

By suziekidder, August 6, 2008 at 6:19 pm Link to this comment

I’m encouraged when I read the comments that preceded mine ... and reminded of the wise words someone said to me in reference to calling those of us who don’t believe we’ve heard the truth yet on 9/11 - conspiracy theorists.  He said that actually he preferred to think of himself as choosing between two competing conspiracy theories:  1) that a dude on dialysis in a cave pulled it off all by himself, and 2) that he had a little assistance from some fairly highly placed individuals in our government.  The current “Bruce Ivins did it and now the case is closed” gives anyone with a functional cortex a similar choice:  1) that we believe that a highly intelligent and equally highly trained biodefense researcher with the highest security clearances went off his rocker and mailed anthrax ... oh, and didn’t remember how to spell penacillin?  Or 2) that he’s a convenient fall guy who was either hounded to suicide or assisted to suicide.  One being more convenient for the FBI ... already with serious egg on its face over Hatfill ... and the Bush Administration.  Given that neither organization has a reputation for honesty ... which conspiracy theory would we prefer?

Report this

By samosamo, August 6, 2008 at 5:30 pm Link to this comment

Terrorists from within, OK, just look at our government, congress, presidential administration, supreme court and the military, oh and the federal reserve and then go look in the mirror because until we really mount some drive and action to stop these people by plain ole complicity we are guilty too. Carry that to church and smoke it.

Report this

By Sepharad, August 6, 2008 at 5:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m surprised that anyone is surprised that terrorists and others seeking to harm this (or any other) country are not always identifiable by their ethnicity or religion or appearance or citizenship or other version of outsiderlyness. Effective terrorists and spies take great pains to blend into their milieu of operations lest they get red-flagged by some diligent profiler or hysterical stereotyper among the citizenry. That’s why intelligence agencies have to cast such broad nets collecting any conceivable bits of data via various methods of eavesdropping—and also why there needs to be stringent judicial review of such activities. Sometimes Big Brother has to be let out to play, but always on a very short leash. Maintaining the right balance is an ongoing task for open societies if they want to protect their ideals and values as well as persons and property.

Report this

By cann4ing, August 6, 2008 at 4:39 pm Link to this comment

A quote from the link provided by Judy Lineham—thank you Judy.

“ABC claimed it had been told by “four well-placed and separate sources” that the anthrax used in the September attack contained bentonite, which therefore suggested it was produced in Iraq. As Greenwald points out, “That means that ABC News’ ‘four well-placed and separate sources’ fed them information that was completely false.” In all likelihood, “the same Government lab where the anthrax attacks themselves came from was the same place where the false reports originated that blamed those attacks on Iraq. ... Surely the question of who generated those false Iraq-anthrax reports is one of the most significant and explosive stories of the last decade.”

“Greenwald goes on to provide details about the psychological impact that the anthrax fabrications played in influencing journalists and propagandizing the American public to support the invasion of Iraq. He also notes that John McCain and Joe Lieberman were among the first people to claim publicly, during an appearance on the David Letterman Show, that the anthrax came from Iraq. (Interestingly, the Bush White House repeatedly denied this claim, despite its overall tendency to exaggerate and fabricate evidence linking Iraq to weapons of mass destruction.)

“Of course, ABC News knows the identity of the “well-placed sources” who fed this false information to them and, through them, to the American public. I’ll leave it to Greenwald to explain the implications:

“And yet, unbelievably, they are keeping the story to themselves, refusing to disclose who did all of this. They’re allegedly a news organization, in possession of one of the most significant news stories of the last decade, and they are concealing it from the public, even years later.”

http://www.prwatch.org/node/7623

It is critical that we not only defeat John McCain in November but that we press a President Obama to reopen the 9/11 investigation including the Anthrax issue.  The only true remedy to the cancer that has infected this nation the past eight years is to subject “everything” that has occurred while the WH was under the control of a criminal enterprise.

  They’re not protecting “sources.” The people who fed them the bentonite story aren’t “sources.” They’re fabricators and liars who purposely used ABC News to disseminate to the American public an extremely consequential and damaging falsehood. But by protecting the wrongdoers, ABC News has made itself complicit in this fraud perpetrated on the public, rather than a news organization uncovering such frauds. That is why this is one of the most extreme journalistic scandals that exists, and it deserves a lot more debate and attention than it has received thus far.

Report this

By cann4ing, August 6, 2008 at 4:03 pm Link to this comment

troublesum—on what basis do you state “it sounds like Ivans did it?”  FBI leaks to the press?  Have you forgotten that it was but a scant few years ago when similar leaks about Stephen Hatfield led the press and people like you to say “it sounds like Hatfield did it.”

There’s this troubling concept in law, so often forgotten by the stenographers of the corporate media who are incapable of critically analyzing the information spoon fed to them by official sources.  It’s called “evidence,” and, so far, the FBI has offered nothing beyond genetic linking of a strain of Anthrax to the military lab where Ivans and ten other researchers worked.  They have presented no evidence regarding the chain of custody of the Anthrax, nothing to show how Ivans converted the liquid form of Anthrax to the powder that was mailed; nothing to show that he did it.  Oh, and there is another legal concept you overlooked—one that applies to Ivans even though he is deceased.  It’s called innocent until “proven” guilty.

What seems to be taking place right now is smearing of the man’s reputation by selective leak.  So stop with “it sounds like Ivans did it.”

Report this

By cann4ing, August 6, 2008 at 3:50 pm Link to this comment

srel, you left off a third possibility, more probable than the two you listed—that John McCain has always been a part of the neocon agenda and that he, along with Bush and Cheney, lied about the alleged Iraq/Anthrax connection.

Report this

By nyvisitor, August 6, 2008 at 3:01 pm Link to this comment

Robert Scheer’s short article, “Terror from the Inside,” misses his own point.  It touches lightly on wrongful accusations of terrorism and yet, despite five light disclaimers, his essay supports the condemnation of a man suspected for years but never charged with the 2001 anthrax attacks by mail.

The language of the 771-word article referring to the suspect might be expected (“nut case” excepted) if the topic were the suspect’s conviction in a court of law after proper presentation of evidence and testimony, and where he was represented by competent counsel.

Social worker therapist Ms. Duley accuses the suspect of being “a revenge killer.”  What evidence supports her accusation that he had killed or is she in the habit of employing such terms loosely in diagnosis or in sworn court testimony.  If she had evidence, the FBI would have brought charges against the man.

Ms. Duley’s term “top psychiatrist” sounds more pop than professional.  What did Ms. Duley mean when she used the phrase “forensic psychiatric diagnosis”?  Is this another term that Ms. Duley may be using loosely?

Why should we believe any agency (including the chief executive and the vice) of the GWB administration?  Their pronouncements no longer are believable; they no longer have any moral authority.  Their military commission suits at Guantanamo and those in US District Courts in Florida, New York, and a few other places show no respect for law, due process, and evidence.

The man is dead now (a reported suicide) after enduring years of a poisonous “investigation” by the US Justice Department.  The case brings to mind the DoJ’s recent unjust, highly-publicized pursuits of named and uncharged suspects who were later cleared.  It used to be standard DoJ practice to refuse to disclose suspects’ names.  Nowadays pursuits of uncharged suspects appear to be part of the News entertainment business.

Report this

By samosamo, August 6, 2008 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment

I thought this was a time for recognizing our most important part in the use of WMDs by remembering the anniversary of the nukeing of Japan and now the placement of US policy to again use nukes preemptively against other nations especially those that are not nuclear capable. Remember, it is a great place in the history of our country and its hypocrisy.

Report this

By srelf, August 6, 2008 at 2:15 pm Link to this comment

Related to the 2001 anthrax scare, why did John McCain say back then that the anthrax probably came from Iraq? Why has ABC News not divulged the names of their “four well-placed and separate sources” telling them that the anthrax contained a substance linking it to Iraq? Was McCain duped into saying untrue statements or was he just stupidly jumping on Bush’s bandwagon?
See:
http://counterpunch.com/rampton08062008.html

Report this

By troublesum, August 6, 2008 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

The country is awash in conspiracy theories.  It sounds like Ivins did it.  Imagine if the unabomber were still a free man today - “Cheney’s behind it!!”

Report this

By nyvisitor, August 6, 2008 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment

Robert Scheer’s short article, “Terror from the Inside,” misses his own point.  It touches lightly on wrongful accusations of terrorism and yet, despite five light disclaimers, his essay supports the condemnation of a man suspected for years but never charged with the 2001 anthrax attacks by mail.

The language of the 771-word article referring to the suspect might be expected (“nut case” excepted) if the topic were the suspect’s conviction in a court of law after proper presentation of evidence and testimony, and where he was represented by competent counsel.

Ms. Duley accuses the suspect of being “a revenge killer.”  What evidence supports her accusation that he had killed or is she in the habit of employing such terms loosely in diagnosis or in sworn court testimony.  If she had evidence, the FBI would have brought charges against the man.

Ms. Duley’s term “top psychiatrist” sounds more pop than professional.  What did Ms. Duley mean when she used the phrase “forensic psychiatric diagnosis”?  Is this another term that Ms. Duley may be using loosely?

Why should we believe any agency (including the chief executive and the vice) of the GWB administration?  Their pronouncements no longer are believable; they no longer have any moral authority.

The man is dead now (a reported suicide) after enduring years of a poisonous “investigation” by the US Justice Department.

The case brings to mind the DoJ’s recent unjust, highly-publicized pursuits of named and uncharged suspects who were later cleared.  It used to be standard DoJ practice to refuse to disclose suspects’ names.  Nowadays pursuits of uncharged suspects appear to be part of the News entertainment business.

Report this

By Greg Bacon, August 6, 2008 at 1:38 pm Link to this comment

There’s a wealth of info at this blog by Meryl Nass, M.D.

Duley had several DWI’s?  And was caught with drug paraphenalia?

Was she looking at jail time for the DWI’s, and loss of her license to practice and loss of her job?

Sounds like motive to make someone squeal like a pig to the feds.

And why is Duley hiding out?  Or did the feds hide out Duley, so the press would not have access to this drunk until they can manufacture the next big diversion?

And where in the hell are the MSM stories about that known homicidal maniac, the one that likes to shoot friends in the face, Dick Cheney, where are the stories about his plans to use Navy SEALS, dress them up as Iranains, put them in boats similiar to the ones Iran uses and make them get into a shooting match with a US Navy ship in the Persian Gulf?

More Information on Ivins’ Therapist

From a story in the Frederick News-Post:

Duley’s fiance of seven years, Mike McFadden, spoke to The Frederick News-Post on Saturday from their home in Williamsport and provided a statement on her behalf.

“Jean is currently at an undisclosed location,” McFadden said.

Duley had numerous meetings with the FBI in the past month, McFadden said, but he declined to provide specific information about those meetings.

He said Ivins had threatened Duley’s life.

Court documents state that Ivins had made “homicidal threats, actions, plans, threats and actions towards therapist.”

Duley, a social worker, led counseling sessions attended by Ivins.

The story of Ivins’ death and investigation by the FBI broke early Friday. Since then, McFadden said, Duley has been hounded by the national press.

Someone broke into her car Friday night, McFadden said, though no police report was filed. “Nothing was taken,” he said, “but everything was jumbled up.”

Duley told the court she had been subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury Friday. She was reluctant to become involved in the FBI’s investigation of Ivins, McFadden said. “She had to quit her job and is now unable to work, and we have spent our savings on attorneys.”

This report raises a number of interesting questions. Why did she have to quit her job? Why is she unable to work? Ivins is deceased and no threat, if he ever was a threat. Was she instructed to hide out by federal employees?

Additional key facts re: the anthrax investigation

Duley herself has a history that, at the very least, raises questions about her credibility. She has a rather lengthy involvement with the courts in Frederick, including two very recent convictions for driving under the influence—one from 2007 and one from 2006—as well as a complaint filed against her for battery by her ex-husband. Here is Duley’s record from the Maryland Judicial data base:

Just three months ago, Duley pled guilty and was sentenced to probation (with a suspended fine of $500), as a result of having been stopped in December, while driving at 1:35 a.m., and charged with driving under the influence:

On April 21, 2006, Duley was also charged with “driving a vehicle while impaired by alcohol,” driving “while impaired by drugs or alcohol,” and reckless driving, and on October 13, 2006, she pled guilty to the charge of reckless driving and was fined $580. Back in 1992, Duley was criminally charged with battery against what appeared to be her now-ex-husband (and she filed a complaint against him as well). Later that same year, she was criminally charged with possession of drug paraphenalia with intent to use, charges which appear to have been ultimately dismissed.

Report this

By heavyrunner, August 6, 2008 at 1:02 pm Link to this comment

It is a frightening concept to think that our government would be involved in murder of our own people.  It’s only natural for a man nearing retirement to be more susceptible to fear than a younger man. 

I, of course don’t know if that explains Mr. Sheer’s unthinking acceptance of the government line on Mr. Ivins, but I know he has argued in the past that, although we need a new investigation, it is nearly impossible to believe that anyone in our government could have been involved in such a thing as 9/11.

But the evidence seems way too often to indicate exactly that, and I am sure Mr. Scheer is exposed to some of it whether he seeks it or not.  So there is a creeping realization in the back of his mind that, he, like so many Americans, would rather not have to face.

And then this amateurish attempt to pin the anthrax case, a part of the whole of 9/11, on a scientist who just “committed suicide.”  We have seen that plot a few times too many.  So questions are asked and we get no evidence of wrongdoing by Dr. Ivins or Dr. Hattfil, but we learn about F.B.I. mass pursuit to harass Dr. Hattfil, even running over his foot at one point with a car, and that Dr. Ivins daughter, when she was in the hospital, confronted with pictures of dead victims of the anthrax part of the 9/11 plot, and told her father “had done this.”

So ol’ Bob could see the dam breaking and the truth of our situation hammering him right in the face and his courage failed him and he unconsciously allowed himself to write the piece above that pretty much parrots the F.B.I. line.

Report this

By srelf, August 6, 2008 at 12:40 pm Link to this comment

Ivins=patsy? Maybe
Bush et.al.= not to be trusted? For sure.

Report this

By Braddockbrat, August 6, 2008 at 12:27 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why did you not mention the background on Ivins’ therapist, social worker Jean Duley.  Her past is a little cloudy.  And Ivans has not been convicted.  And since his death, we will never know whether this is another true investigation or another fairy tale. 

Did you read about the fake letter, dated July, 2001, from Habbush to Saddam.  Should we give our leaders and their pronouncements a free ride?

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, August 6, 2008 at 12:00 pm Link to this comment

So, the government, i.e., Shrub, wanted the anthrax incident to be the work of Islamofascistmuslimnightgownedradicalextremist-terrorists, but, according to a LEAK, the FBI blames it on a dead man who got dissed by a KKG sorority sister from PU (can’t even refer to her as a PU student because it’s just toooo mundane.)

Good Gawd!  Hollywood couldn’t have done better!
Gene Hackman is Ivins, only because he’s in just about every movie.  Paris, the sorority sister.  Bush, the mailbox (standing on his head.) I could go on. 

Hey, Cyrena, I’m with you.

Report this

By Nicolas, August 6, 2008 at 11:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Shame on you, Truthdig. I have come to expect more from you than this. Has it ever crossed your mind that it might be plausible that the poor guy was killed and framed by the real culprits?

Start digging for the truth, please.

Report this

By diamond, August 6, 2008 at 11:16 am Link to this comment

Robert S. you should hang your head in shame. This article is a chain of lies, smears and innuendo from beginning to end. What the hell is wrong with you Robert and how much did they pay you to write this article? You’re blackening the name of an innocent man, does that mean anything to you at all?A man who has been wrongly accused and hounded to his death to protect Dick Cheney and his gang of criminal masterminds. The FBI has been completely corrupted and now has no credibility at all. Apparently they visited Ivins’ daughter Amanda when she was hospitalized to show her photos of children killed by anthrax and told her ‘Your father did this.’ Well actually, no he didn’t. It was Dick. As usual.

Report this

By teal, August 6, 2008 at 11:04 am Link to this comment

The new speculation about Ivins is that he borrowed a lyophilizer from his workplace in order to use it at home to transform the liquid form of anthrax used in his lab into a fine anthrax powder similar to the powder used in the anthrax attacks.  This speculation does not take into account that the powdered anthrax is exceptionally dangerous and requires extraordinary protections which would not have been available in Ivins’ home.  Furthermore, lyophilizers are often used for the innocent purpose of conserving food.

My heart goes to the Ivins’ family.

Report this

By teal, August 6, 2008 at 10:50 am Link to this comment

Ivins had to defend himself against increasing FBI attempts to nail him. He had to take a polygraph, that he must have passed since the anthrax case is still open. Being aware of Hatfill’s tribulations, Ivins, either of his own initiative or at the request of his employer, tried to alleviate his unbearable pain by seeking some therapy.  Unfortunately, the therapist, Jean C. Dudly, a social worker, was not a trained psychiatrist bound by the physician’s oath to do no harm. Ivins was only offered group therapy, a simplified form of therapy, totally inadequate for severe crises. The social worker panicked and reported Ivins to the Court, asking for urgent protection.  She abandoned her client.
Just before taking his own life, Ivins, who still had his security clearance, attended a work related meeting with his colleagues.  Later that day, Ivins was institutionalized (probably involuntarily) and almost immediately release and allowed to take his own life. The case is now in the process of getting closed and, conveniently enough, Ivins will never get a settlement, although his colleagues, who have known him and worked closely with him for years, have only good things to say about him and suspect that he may be as innocent as Hatfill.
(To be continued)

Report this

By felicity, August 6, 2008 at 10:44 am Link to this comment

I second heavyrunner.  Please read Vincent Bugliosi’s book, “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.”

Report this

By teal, August 6, 2008 at 10:29 am Link to this comment

Ivins took his own life when it became obvious that he would lose his security clearance and thus his only source of income.  He had been subjected to the kind of harassment that was reserved for Steven J. Hatfill who later obtained a $5.8 settlement from the government to forgo a privacy lawsuit.  Like Ivins, Hatfill had worked at Fort Detrick and had been relentlessly accused of having the opportunity and the means to commit the anthrax attacks.
(To be continued)

Report this
Robert's avatar

By Robert, August 6, 2008 at 10:29 am Link to this comment

August 5, 2008

“Here, Broken Laws Be Left ... “

The Anthrax Attacks and the Assault on Civil Liberties

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

“The anthrax scare is one more example of the Bush Regime’s use of disinformation to advance an undeclared political agenda. As Glenn Greenwald reminded us last week in Salon, the Bush Regime used Brian Ross at ABC News to spread the lie far and wide that US government tests proved that the anthrax mailed to various Americans, including prominent US Senators, was made in Iraq by Saddam Hussein. This lie was essential for scaring Congress into passing the Bush Regime’s Gestapo laws, such as the PATRIOT Act, and for overcoming opposition to invading Iraq.

When it leaked out that the anthrax actually came from a US government lab, the Bush Regime tried to frame a US scientist, Steven J. Hatfill, but failed. On June 28th, the Los Angeles Times reported that Hatfill, “The former Army scientist who was the prime suspect in the deadly 2001 anthrax mailings agreed Friday to take $5.82 million from the government to settle his claim that the Justice Department and the FBI invaded his privacy and ruined his career.” Indeed, U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton allowed Hatfill’s attorneys two years to review all news reports and FBI evidence. Judge Walton stated: “there is not a scintilla of evidence that would indicate that Dr. Hatfill had anything to do with this.”

The anthrax matter was again news last week when another US government scientist, Bruce E. Ivins, “committed suicide.” Instantly, the deceased Ivins was fingered as the culprit. Overnight a man, liked and respected by his colleagues, who had worked on American biological warfare weapons for years, became a deranged homicidal maniac who decided to murder Americans at random in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 by sending them letters containing anthrax.

I don’t believe a word of it. But assume that it is true. Blaming the anthrax letters on Ivins does not resolve the issue of why the Bush Regime lied to Brian Ross and used ABC to put the blame on Saddam Hussein in order to invade an innocent country. Wouldn’t a government that would lie about something this serious lie about other serious matters?

The Bush Regime stands against against the truth. That is why it pretends to have the power to prevent executive branch officials wanted for questioning by Congress from appearing before the people’s representatives. Nothing could make clearer the contempt that the Bush Regime has for the American people and their elected representatives than its arrogant claim that it is unanswerable to them.

Obviously, neither the President nor the Vice President respect their oaths of office. If they will betray such a serious oath, won’t they lie about everything?

According to the discredited 9/11 Commission Report, a few Muslims hatched a multi-year plot that went undetected by the vast security agencies of the United States and its allies, and within one hour on one morning at four different locations defeated airport security, NORAD, the US Air Force, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, the Pentagon’s defenses and crashed three hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center towers and the heart of the US military. Muslims were able to achieve this fantastic feat operating out of caves in Afghanistan.

We now know for a fact that the “terrorist anthrax attack” had nothing whatsoever to do with Muslim terrorists. Even the US Government now blames white American citizens, employees of the federal government, for the anthrax letters that, at the time, were blamed on the “Osama bin Laden al Qaeda plot against America.””


http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts08052008.html

Report this

By Judy Linehan, August 6, 2008 at 10:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

As other Truthdigging readers note, at best Robert Scheer merely skims the surface here. For a non-government fed piece I commend to you http://www.prwatch.org/node/7623

Uncovering the truth in the Ivins story is critically important. A read of James W Douglass’ chilling, riveting, and impeccably researched, “JFK and the Unspeakable”, will confirm this.

Please let’s dig deeper and not be prematurely satisfied with spoon fed journalism.

Report this

By heavyrunner, August 6, 2008 at 9:35 am Link to this comment

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-schoenfeld5-2008aug05,0,3360861.story


Not the FBI’s proudest moment
The anthrax case may be the latest botched investigation by the bureau.
By Gabriel Schoenfeld
August 5, 2008
The FBI’s investigation of the deadly 2001 anthrax attacks was the most complex and important in the bureau’s history. Immense resources were invested in the search for the perpetrator, whose actions killed five people, sickened 17 others, sowed panic in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and caused taxpayers to spend extraordinary sums on a crash program to protect the nation against the danger of biological terrorism.  .  .

Report this

By Louise, August 6, 2008 at 9:16 am Link to this comment

This article is based on three ASSUMED premises.

First that Jean Dully is in any way believable.

Second that Ivin’s did the deed.

Third that Ivin’s committed suicide.

First. Jean Dully is a strange if not bonkers lady. And it’s a real stretch to believe a successful microbiologist with an impeccable record was actually pining away for decades over his lost love of a fruitcake. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3727237

Second. There actually is NO hard proof Ivin’s did the deed.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/aug2008/anth-a04.shtml
http://whatreallyhappened.com/taxonomy/term/68

Third. Suicide by Tylenol? That’s the hardest bit to swallow. Someone with access to all the fun poisons we keep around could have, and probably would have selected something with a few more built-in, and quicker for sure’s. Duh ...
http://whatreallyhappened.com/

This brings to mind the “suicide” of another microbiologist. Remember Kelly? He was the guy in GB who committed suicide by cutting his wrists and bleeding to death. Only when his body was found, no blood was found. Wow! That’s a real mystery ...

I think like Kelly, “Ivin’s was suicided” by [fill in the blank] And that really doesn’t take a whole lot of deep thinking.

So, who did the deed? Who knows? Maybe it was an “insider” with instructions from the “inside” to create a “terrorist” attack and frame al-Qaeda. Which could be the only reason why Bush instructed the FBI to link it to al-Qaeda. Even Bush, with his limited capacity would have realized how tough that would be unless there was a fore-warning and he was waiting, fully believing whoever did the deed was smart enough to make it look like al-Qaeda.

‘Course the dummy who did it lacked sufficient brain capacity to understand just writing “Muslim” notes wasn’t going to be convincing. Well except to mainstreammedia who obligingly were convinced. And some congress-folks who also operate with limited capacity. Darn. And perhaps the dummy who did it, didn’t realize using home-grown pathogens would put a bit of a kink in the “thread” proving you don’t need to be smart to follow the despots plan to bring down America, just obedient. [But maybe being really dumb helps]

Or maybe I’m wrong. So dig a little deeper Scheer. You might find selfish kids in need of money. A generational loser in need of money. An incompetent FBI willing to sacrifice someone they had managed to harass into a state of anx. A bunch of “good” people willing to pay bribes to create witnesses. And a bunch of “witnesses” willing to take a bribe. But I feel reasonably confident you wont find the truth. That’s buried way too deep under an ever-growing pile of excrement.

Report this

By cann4ing, August 6, 2008 at 8:37 am Link to this comment

Fadel, it isn’t often that I disagree with you, but in this instance, I am not certain I would apply the word “excellent” to Scheer’s piece.  Good, maybe, but not excellent because of what it left out. 

Scheer fails to mention that the Anthrax letters were mailed on 9/11; that they were worded to falsely link al Qaeda to the Anthrax, conveniently permitting the Bush regime to play on public fear of a second assault; that Bush, Cheney & McCain, all without a scintilla of proof, publicly speculated that the Anthrax was linked to Iraq, and, Scheer too easily buys into uncritically accepting the FBI’s designation of Dr. Ivans as, in Scheer’s words, “the only person to ever attack us with WMD”—this despite the fact that the FBI has not produced any evidence of his guilt.  Recall, that Ivans was not the first Anthrax researcher to be targeted by the FBI and that the first one recently received a multi-million dollar settlement because of the false accusations the FBI and an uncritical media had leveled against him.

Scheer also fails to mention that the irony that a government purportedly so concerned with Iraqi WMD busies itself developing its own weapons grade Anthrax.  For what purpose?  If the U.S. put that weapons grade Anthrax to use against a foreign nation, comprised of innocent civilians of multiple faiths or no faith at all, would that be anything less than an act of terrorism?

We deal with an FBI and a government which has still not explained why, on 9/11, WTC 7, which was not struck by a plane, collapsed into its own footprint in the span of 8.7 seconds; why Rudy Guiliani told reporters on 9/11 that he had been instructed to evacuate WRC 7 some fifteen minutes earlier because he was told that the building was going to come down.  And now we have this weapons grade Anthrax, linked to a U.S. military facility, and mailed on 9/11 in letters attempting to implicate al Qaeda. 

The work of a single, crazed scientist or part of a larger and much more sinister conspiracy that goes to the highest levels of the U.S. government?  We don’t have sufficient information to answer that question.  Perhaps we never will.

Report this

By webbedouin, August 6, 2008 at 8:33 am Link to this comment

Hey Robert,

Dr. Phil Zack did the deed.  Pass it on…

Report this

By socalcde, August 6, 2008 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

To call Ivins a “nutcase” seems to be accepting the FBI’s story that, as stated by skulz fontaine above, has holes big enough to drive a truck through. If it’s true that both of Ivins’ children were offered money and cars etc. to produce evidence against their father, and that this sorority that he supposedly drove to in New Jersey doesn’t even have a residence there, but just a storage for their caps and gowns etc, I think that it’s time to press for more information from more sources before swallowing this hook that allows the FBI to close this investigation.

Report this

By heavyrunner, August 6, 2008 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/04/anthrax/index.html

UPDATE V: This is simply pathetic. The original AP article linked above—containing the Grand, Super-Incriminating Sorority Obsession Leak—contained this paragraph:

  The top suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks was obsessed with a sorority that sat less than 100 yards away from a New Jersey mailbox where the toxin-laced letters were sent, authorities said today.

Wow. Incriminating. Now, the AP article has been “updated” to this (h/t Jim White):

  The mailbox just off the campus of Princeton University where the letters were mailed sits about 100 yards away from where the college’s Kappa Kappa Gamma chapter stores its rush materials, initiation robes and other property. Sorority members do not live there, and the Kappa chapter at Princeton does not provide a house for the women.

So apparently, the Big Incriminating FBI Leak of the Day is that Ivins was so obsessed with this sorority that he used the mailbox near where it “stores its rush materials, initiation robes and other property,” and used that mailbox to send anthrax to Pat Leahy, Tom Daschle and Tom Brokaw. That’s really convincing. Let’s close the investigation. We clearly got the Anthrax Killer. The FBI looked through its bag of conclusive evidence and that is what they chose to leak today? And amazingly, the Keystone Cops in our Government and their Media allies can’t even get a leak this laughable right the first time they convey it. Ask Steven Hatfill about that. As The Hartford Courant Editorial Page today wrote (h/t macgupta):

Report this

By heavyrunner, August 6, 2008 at 8:10 am Link to this comment

The F.B.I. has backtracked on the sorority story.  As it turns out, there was no chapter of the sorority mentioned at Princeton, and the mailbox in question was just near a storage facility where said sorority rented a mini garage where they kept some old costumes.  So the original F.B.I. leak about Ivins going to Princeton to be near a Sorority is a real stretch since Ivins would have had no way of knowing the storage facility was even there.

The “this man is nuts” stuff comes from a woman who has taken a couple of years of undergraduate courses in psychology and has a long record of substance abuse and trouble with the law.  This may have relevance to her flaunting of professional standards of confidentiality.  It has also come to light that she was urged to get the restraining order by the F.B.I.  Restraining orders are easy to get and are a standard method of defaming someone, so the entire calumny about Mr. Ivins’ intellectual state does not pass the smell test.

What we do know is that the anthrax came from a U.S. biowarfare lab and was used to intimidate Leahy and Daschle and twisted to create fear and connected to Iraq so as to further the project of going to war based on lies.

Please read “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder” by Vincent Bugliosi.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/index.html

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, August 6, 2008 at 7:50 am Link to this comment

Excellent piece indeed! And the best part of it is the implied message that those who spend huge amounts of treasure, effort and time developing weapons of mass destruction are bound, in one way or another, to have a taste of their own medicine.

This is a theme on which I have posted many many times before and therefore I feel overjoyed that an important progressive journalist like Robert Scheer is writing about it.

Having said this, there is one weak point in the article that might diminish some of its value; and that’s the insinuation that the culprit was a deranged psychopath, acting out of psychological imbalance. This is always the simplistic way in explaining domestic terrorism, which almost borders on giving excuses to culprits.

On the other hand, when the issue is related to international terrorism, especially if it’s traced back to some Islamic elements, the explanation given is again the simplistic reasoning that they are evil fanatic terrorist killers who hate our freedoms and are driven by pure evil. That the international terrorists might have political, national or economic grievances is never given a consideration in explaining their terrorism!

Report this

By eric barth, August 6, 2008 at 7:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Again Robert Scheer has put his finger on an obvious fact that Americans have ignored, i.e., that the United States Government has reserved to itself the absolute right to produce and store WMD in all their forms. Whether Mr. Ivans was the guilty party in the anthrax mail attacks we may now never know for sure. It seems that the social worker who reported his mental problems and alleged homicidal proclivities may have some problems of her own. This aside, the scenario Mr. Scheer outlines in his article stands. Unbalanced or dangerous persons within our own Military-Industrial Complex is a real threat to our safety and freedoms. General Jack D. Ripper was only the most extreme representation of this problem.

Report this
skulz fontaine's avatar

By skulz fontaine, August 6, 2008 at 6:33 am Link to this comment

There are enough holes in the “Ivins scenario”, one could drive a truck through those holes. Golly, the whiz-bang Amerikan government couldn’t offer up a plausible answer for 9/11/01. Ivins was driven to his untimely end by an inept FBI and heck, the FBI couldn’t deliver the ‘investigative’ goods on the Oklahoma City bombing. Gosh, seems there’s a “track record” here of Keystone Cop modality and lying politicians using an investigative branch of government to bolster ridiculous propaganda. Hmmm, Iraq and wmd’s? Yup, that’d be one. So the Bushistas “bagged” themselves another scapegoat and ‘we the people’ are left in the dark like the democratic mushrooms we’ve become. Kept in the dark and fed bulls*#t!

Report this

By Brian Vawter, August 6, 2008 at 6:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

How can you just go along with this scenario that raises more questions than answers them?
Who benefited from these anthrax attacks?
They helped rush the Patriot Act through Congress and kept America afraid.
This guy Ivens smells like a fall guy to me.

Report this
Paul_GA's avatar

By Paul_GA, August 6, 2008 at 6:28 am Link to this comment

Besides oil, as I see it, the Iraq and Afghan wars were all about imperial power and position vis-a-vis Russia and China; and the former was also fought mainly on behalf of Israel (the idea being that if the USA were to “take out” the Muslim states that were Israel’s enemies, i.e., Iraq, Syria and Iran, this country would then be “making the Middle East safe for Israel”). All they needed was an excuse for being; and the 9/11 atrocity and the anthrax scare were the excuses.

Report this

By Luther Brixton, August 6, 2008 at 5:33 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ivins, like Steven Hatfield before him, is most likely a scapegoat and 100% innocent. The so-called “case” against him has more holes in it than swiss cheese, and the social worked (whose testimony appears to be the sole reason for pinning the anthrax attacks on Ivins) was not only requested by the FBI to get a restraining order against Ivins (!), but has an incredibly shady past. If you want a good laugh, try reading her restraining order—written in her own words—and try not to remember that the writer isn’t 7 years old:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax1.html

Why Ivins is being scapegoated is something the Congress should immediately investigate. As with Hatfield’s “guilt”, it doesn’t pass the smell test. And as usual, our media poses no questions and is just happy as hell to be able to deliver whatever lies the Bush administration’s wants to tell the general public.

For more on the framing of Ivins, I suggest reading the excellent series of investigative articles (remember when the US media used to do them) by Glenn Greenwald at Salon—see if you still think he’s guilty:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

Report this

By VietnamVet, August 6, 2008 at 4:41 am Link to this comment

Please note this sort of obscure point in the article:

“The United States did not go to war in Iraq solely because of WMD. In my view, I doubt it was even the principal cause.”

Hell no the WMDs were not the primary cause. Australia, one of the early “yeah lets attack” entities finally admitted, almost two years ago, that OIL was one of the primary reasons. See this link:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jul2007/oil-j06.shtml

Bush, Cheny, and the other ilk beside them planned the attack on Iraq from the gitgo and BOTH of them are oil barons of the first tier. That the American people elevated this trash to the White House is still mind boggling.

Let’s not make the same mistake this time around: just keep in mind that despite Mr. McCain’s claim to be a maverick, HE HAS VOTED TO SUPPORT MR. BUSH 95 PERCENT OF THE TIME. He has readily admitted this fact. And, “bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran,” “...might be in Iraq 100 years….”, “...withdraw with Victory…” without defining what that means, and the list goes on. Don’t let him scare you into casting your vote for him!

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, August 6, 2008 at 4:25 am Link to this comment

Having worked as a soial worker- thus familiar with many personalities which seek such a field, and directly with some Psychiatrist- and have been introduced to some of their personalities traits- I do not hold much credence in THEIR mental stability- or motives.
Case in Point for a SW- Worked tooth & nail to return an adopted baby from a couple , who had the means, ability and desire to raise the child, to his homeless, prostituting drug addicted mother. She is not the only SW I’ve met or heard of who were willing to forgo anothers welfare to fulfill their own sense of Importance.
I worked with a Psychiatrist who proudly told him he does not perscribe any psychotropic to his geriatric patients which he has not tried. So he pops pills without regard to his own safety, probably did not take them long enough to expereince their effects- or side effects, was not on the other med these geriatrics would be on (Cardiac,bllod pressure, blood thiners etc) and He was in his 40’s- not his 80’s. he snowed one woman so bad because she would cry out ‘help me’ repeatedly- she could not only Not speak, but could no longer sit up in her chair!
My job in LTC was to work between the bitching Nursing staff & the Drug crazed Docs to assure the patients were not drugged beyond the benefit to the Patient! I had to remind these ‘Professionls’ that it was Against these patients rights to use psychotropics for the Benefit of the Staff.
Having started college with the goal of a Psychology degree, I soon realized the University I was attending was a ‘Behaviorist school’ - the equivolent of ‘clicker training’ for humans. I considered the Social Work college, but also recognized it lack any substanitive theory on Why people behave as they do. So I went to the college which the behaviorist suggested ‘The Soc dept’ he spit at me- they teach all those other ridiculous theories, those which take into consideration the ‘Human Element’.
so from reports regarding Ms.Duly- she’s another self absorbed ‘crusader’ and yet we have heard nothing form those who are required to over see her work..Where’s the Psychiatrists- are they wack jobs too? have no doubt - those who go into these type field are not motivated by others welbeing, but are often searching for answers to their Own problems.when I moved out of Individuals and moved towards Group dynamics, I could see how certain trees infected with their own diseases could fuck up others around them- if not the entire forest. Ms.Duly may be suffering from her own mental illness and delusions.Note- the granddaddy of Behaviorism- Skinner- developed a Box which could be used to deliver ‘Rewards’ ‘Punishment’ or Nothing to a subject without the scientist’s involvement- he not only put rats in there to study the theory and the effectivenss of this Box- He Put his SON in there, like one of his Rat subjects! There are numerous cases in which ‘professional’ psychitrists have done immoral and unethical things to push forward their Theories/Reputation.
So when it comes to determining a persons mental state of mind- I give far more credence to those who knew him best- friends, family and Co Workers.
Not to mention the growing evidence about how much this admin has cooked up to get a foot hold in the M.E.

Report this
G.Anderson's avatar

By G.Anderson, August 6, 2008 at 2:24 am Link to this comment

I wonder how somone who clearly was pathologicaly insane could be allowed to work in Bio-Warfare.

I wonder how he could have passed psychological evaluations for his job, or worse yet, was his sanity ever evaluated at all?

I suppose it is too little to expect, that his bossess at the Army would take responsibility for allowing a lunatic to do the kind of work he did.
I’ts not enough to call him crazy, and say look what he did. That doesn’t absolve those in power, no matter how much they try to play the blame game,  for their lack of responsibilty.

Yes he was nuts, Cold comfort for those he apparently killed and their families.  God only knows what kind of monsters the Army is growing, in the name of national defense.

Report this

By cyrena, August 6, 2008 at 2:24 am Link to this comment

Good article, except that I’m still not convinced that Ivins is the guy behind the anthrax attacks. And if he was a nutcase, (which he obviously turned out to be) I’m perfectly willing to believe that he was driven crazy.

Unfortunately, we can’t make the same excuses for the really dangerous mass murderers like Dick Cheney et al.

Report this

By K, August 6, 2008 at 12:49 am Link to this comment

It’s articles like this that make Truthdig what it is.

Thank you, Robert Scheer.

Excellent. This has been a long, long, long 8 years.

Truthdig has kept me sane in this insane world.

Keep it up. I think it’s the best blog. Period. So crucial in these times.

Report this

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook