-A lot of people say that a lot of the information which could have been helpful left on the charter planes which Bush allowed to leave with Saudis and Bin Laden's relatives. And it's possible critical evidence left with the debris from the towers, hurriedly shipped away.-

OK, who's a foil-clad 9/11 truth-nutter now?

Though I completely agree with your points, which touches on but one or two of the many remaining unanswered questions in the very long list in the wake of the government's seriously incomplete and (to any that have explored this story in depth)ludicrously feeble attempt at an industrial scale cover-up and the subsequent official 'investigation' of 9/11.

Please pass the Reynold's wrap, Derbig....

Was Ivins a compatriot of Philip Zack? Who was the woman whose desk Ivins cleaned without letting anyone know? Was it Dr. Marion K. Rippey, the person who snuck Zack into the Ft. Detrick lab after he had been fired for harrassment of Dr. Assad?

As Jeff Sharlet quoted them in his excellent article in Harper's, God Plus One, there are "fundies" in this nation who advocate "Hitler-like" or "Stalin-like" tactics -- because, of course, god is on their side. Just like the other factions engaging in acts of terrorism directed at the american people. Zack actions at Ft. Detrick sound like he was a major racist. Someone among the Zach "KKK" is the most logical suspect when the anthrax attacker(s) tried to blame Dr. Assad, yet again. So, was Ivins part of this group?

I wonder if the anonymous poster who claims to have known Ivins knows if he was part of Zach's group. Did Ivins get reprimanded too? Who was the female that Ivins helped to covertly remove any possible anthrax? Was this female complicit -- was she paranoid because of her involvement in this anthrax attack that they then tried to blame on Assad? I don't know, but these are surely questions that should be answered... tho I know they won't be.

oh hell yes I believe Bush and Cheney would okay an "Operations Northwoods" style plan in order to achieve their and the neocon objective - overthrow Sadddam and sell off Iraq to the highest bidder.

I can see a convergence of interests. The fundies (were the Ft. Detrick "KKK-ers" part of a larger right wing/racist movement?) hate Muslims and want to bring on the destruction of the earth so that they can hitch a ride on the Jeebus all the way to heaven. Then Bush and the oil cos that designed the energy policy with Cheney wanted cheap oil/easy looting. Judicial Watch revealed the plans where these corporations and Cheney had already divided Iraq before 9-11. It was one reason Cheney was too busy to pay attention to the briefings on al Qaeda - one of the reasons he held exactly NO tactical meetings with anyone about the threat of terrorism. Feith, out of Cheney's office, is connected to the Netanyahu-ites who also wrote their "new american century" (Securing the Realm) permanent revolution manifesto. OBL wants to overthrow the House of Saud and the house of Bush (both former biz partners... sometimes it seems like this is global chessboard version of Dallas, huh?) And then there's Judith Miller and her work to propagate the fiction that Iraq had bioweapons that had not degraded beyond use. And the yellow cake from Niger that wasn't there, tho Bush claimed it was. And the Atta meeting in the Czech Republic, which the Czech Republic claim did not happen (they're our allies now, right?)

And what about the break-in at the Niger Embassy in Rome... that clumsily forged letter, just like the clumsily fake anthrax letter.

There are just so many questions. I think Ivins was the designated fall guy to wrap up this investigation before a democrat takes office. Of course, they'll leave their economic mess for the democrats to clean up (yet again... this sure gets old...)

Laura Rozen has done excellent work about these issues. Thank you for doing so as well.

I mentioned that because a friend reminded me of that particular episode in a discussion yesterday.

Dr. Bruce Ivins had two issued patents and two published patent applications in the area of anthrax vaccines. All of his cases were assigned to the United States of America, which is standard operating procedure for government employees. None of these patents or applications were under a secrecy order. It is really interesting then, that the file wrapper tab has been removed by the PTO on its website, effectively stopping any web-enabled access to the file wrappers for these cases. I do not know whether the file wrappers can be accessed by using a third party service.

Why does this matter? It matters because a file wrapper is a history and documentation of how a patent was procurred. It frequently contains "tells" of the prosecuting attorney, the examiner and the inventor regarding issues that arise during prosecution. By law, the file wrapper should be public, unless the DOD issues a secrecy order for a case, which was not done here.

Excellent post. Those are the questions which have been swirling around in my head, too. How does Ivins tie in with all the other things we have heard about the Detrick operation?

Thanks!

1. Go to the Jimmy Carter library

http://jimmycarterlibrary.org/library/oralhistory/clohproject/dean.phtml

(link in sig)

2. Read the account of the US Ambassador to India, John Gunther Dean. Read specifically the section on India.

3. Dean had various doubts about US policy and about the assassination of Pakistani General Zia-ul Haq. But when he went to Washington for consultations - go to around Dean 411 -

When I arrived in Washington in September 1988 "on consultation", I was quickly abused of my impression that I had firm appointments with Secretary Schultz or Vice President Bush. Instead, I saw the Head of the Intelligence and Research Division at State, Ambassador Mort Abramowitz, and the Director General of the Foreign Service, George Vest. Both were good friends. Nonetheless, I was disappointed that nobody at the top level was interested to hear what my assessment was of the evolving situation in South Asia. Instead, I was asked to see the medical unit of the State Department where my sanity was questioned. Why was I sent to the Medical Unit?

In trying to explain "within government channels" what happened to Zia's plane, I shared with my friends some thoughts which went contrary to the public posture of the U.S. government. Could it be that the real opponents of Islamic fundamentalism's efforts to gain political control of Afghanistan were the unconditional supporters of Israel? Certainly the Israeli lobby was the most active element in Washington in opposing Pakistan's efforts to obtain a nuclear capability — the "Islamic Bomb". (Footnote) Was the determined effort to oppose nuclear proliferation by some politicians also a way of protecting Israel against Moslem states building "an Islamic Bomb"? In short, I suggested that pro-Israeli circles might have been in collusion with anti-Zia elements in Pakistan and disgruntled Indian Agents in bringing about the August 17, 1988 crash of Zia's plane. I was convinced that neither the Pentagon nor the State Department was involved in this tragedy.

I also doubted that the CIA was directly involved. But the behaviour of the American establishment in covering up the crash and procrastinating on sending investigating teams to Pakistan appeared strange and worrisome to those who wanted America to stand for truth-and fairness.

The reaction to my concerns about our Afghan policy, the possible linkage of events in South Asia on the imbroglio in the Near East, and the confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union on the future of Afghanistan, was quite different from what I had expected from Washington. Perhaps I had forgotten to take into account that this was a crucial period before the November Presidential Election in the U.S., and that the last thing either political party wanted was a major international scandal which could be exploited by

the contenders in T.V. debates. Hence, the decision of the American top authorities was to "get J.G.D. out of the way". By questioning my sanity, backed up by reports from psychiatrists and different medical doctors, (appointments made by the State Department Medical Unit), the Department of State was able to take away my medical clearance. Now it was a question of how to get J.G.D. out of the way until the November Presidential Election was over. By not sending me back to New Delhi, I could not write embarrassing messages. By keeping me out of Washington, I could not speak with inquisitive journalists trying to find issues to make the election debates more meaningful. In short, I was an embarrassment to the administration. At first, I thought I would be sent to an asylum. Fortunately, that idea was discarded and I was sent to Switzerland, to our house in the mountains, for "recuperation". I received orders to stay there until I received word to return to New Delhi to pack up our personal belongings and leave post. In short, I was not allowed to return, from Washington, to my post because "my health" did not permit it! Then and perhaps still today, I equate these kind of procedures with the Stalinist regime in the Soviet Union. I could not imagine

that these methods could be employed by an American administration to one of its Senior Foreign Service officers. Wouldn't it have been easier just to say to me that I was wrong, both in my analysis of the situation in Afghanistan and in my interpretation of the Zia plane crash?

I'm pretty sure Dr. Bruce Ivins did not have a house in Switzerland to which he could be confined.