Hatfill was lucky he wasn't suicided!

Why was there this wild, continual attack on Hatfill, along with press leaks and practically a posse of papparazzi following him?

Seems as if all the time (according to current stories) Ivins was a suspect? And if Ivins had the sociopathic and homicidal tendencies, why was he allowed such a high position and security clearance?

I also see no (but I havent read ALL of the 500 letters) mention of the strange coincidence with the attack on Sens. Leahy & Daschle and the fact that they were the two who could have stopped the "Patriot Act" that they were known to disfavor.

Blew my mind. After reading this posting, something very dangerous has happened, and will continue to happen. Insiders were told about a very specific bio-threat (could have been anything right?), and the exact counter measures to take against it, all before the actual attack!!!!!!

For me, suddenly the things I have read abot 9-11 and the anthrax attacks seem to have cogent theme to tie alot of them together. I used to dismiss alot of things I read, but now... High government officials told not to fly commerical before 9-11. FBI field agents stonewalled over warrants for certain Arabs at flight schools. Bush and Cheney seriously discussing false flag operations to initiate war against Iraq and Iran. DOJ officials afraid they were being wiretapped, and Bush asking telcoms before 9-11 to spy on Americans. Justin Rainmode of antiwar.com offering the observation soon after

9-11 that the conspirators seemed at times to have guardian angels rather than pure luck. While the anthrax letters spewing anti-Semitism, no highly visible Jews in government were targeted--rather liberal Senate leadership.

The trajectory is clear--some of the details are wrong. Ivins I am convinced was innocent. Focusing on an innocent guy leads away from the trail of those who did it, and those who knew about it. But Glenn's trail appears to be correct--somebody in the government did in fact supply the anthrax, and the attack was pushed and shaped by somebody in the government also.

Ondelette's post @2:46 really points out the need for a good time line of the events here.

I will start to put together something after I finish a few things but if people want to throw out important events with the date and time as specific as possible, along with a link to the source material that would help a lot.

I will start--

- On July 24, he was released from the facility, operated by Sheppard Pratt Health System.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-anthrax1-2008aug01,0,3772533.story?page=2

All I can say is, I hope it is true, about OD'ing on Tylenol 3.

If not, what a firkin final insult to the poor schlmazel! If they said that about me, I'd be so mad I'd come back to life and insist on an autopsy!

It's like dieing from a cold, as those things go.

Of course, that is the question, isn't it? Was he the schlemiel or the schlamazel?

But then that's always the question, isn't it? I need to go work on my gown. Miss Creant will make a fabulous entrance!

So it wasn't an unscheduled hunting trip?

ABC didn't like my second comment, they are not posting it.

Me: Mr. Ross, Please describe to your readers which kind of 'Patriot' you are.

Was I rude?

It's possible, acetaminophen can be toxic. Narcotics, even one as mild as codeine can give a hell of a whack to the un-acclimatized (I've seen that) as well as potentiate other CNS depressants.

But if somebody asked me, I would have said it was really hard.

Cheney took him duck hunting and there was an awful incident.

Having been through a similar situation, the Medical Examiner does only those tests which are necessary to definitively determine the cause of death. That means in this case that the autopsy stops when the liver failure is confirmed by blood tests and this matches the known ingestion of the tylenol+codeine pills. Don't forget this guy was treated in the hospital for 2 days before he died, there is much more medical information. What the police guy should have said is that there would be no further autopsy. They did conduct an examination called for in an abnormal death. My guess is that any other investigation (some of which is not done by the Medical Examiner, but by a detective) would center on signs of struggle, etc., if it was in dispute as to whether the drugs were self-administered. But they don't need to go further than confirming the drug overdose for the medical part.

The way they do these things balances what they need to know with the interests of the deceased's family, for whom, even if it weren't so high profile, a suicide and the subsequent investigation is a huge emotional blow. The media has spent a lot of space on the emotions of the anthrax victims' families, but there is one other family involved, as far as the authorities are concerned.

with one answer. I must have missed this in the news reports. How did Mr. Ivins die? I keep reading suicide, but what was the method. Sorry if this is a distressful topic to anyone.

What was the method? The usual gunshot?

The government snuff him out? This seems to be the only logical explanation of how all of these things fit together. Clearly Cohen and ABC have more to tell, if they would tell it.

I find it hard to imagine Ivins in a group therapy setting. I wonder if I know any professional who would have recommended such a thing based on what's been disclosed.

I have a feeling that 10 minutes with Ms. Duley and I might be having postal thoughts myself.

-And to those who are yelling, "tinfoil hat time," please know that when the truth finally is out, you are going to feel awfully embarrassed. Might want to stock up on codeine-laced Tylenol yourself for that occasion.-

No, they will deny they ever said so or claim, 'What I *really* meant was....'

That is how they operate.