See chart on page 8 of "07-524-M-01 Search warrant affidavit". The extra hours in Suite B3 start in August 2001. Any motivations based on 9/11 cannot account for these hours.

Also, doing the math on the hours in Sept '01 leaves almost 19 hrs of evening work unaccounted for (see tables listing consecutive evening shifts pages 8 & 9). Given zero evening shift hours in B3 from Sept 16th-25th (as stated at bottom of page 8), there aren't that many post 9-11 evenings available.

Government produced anthrax kills a few liberuls, collateral damage to postal workers.

Anthrax threat used to hype war with Iraq, stampede congress and public to fear.

Scapegoat found, hounded to death. Case solved!

Move on, nothing to see here....

probably weren't real, it wasn't quite safe to ignore them ...

Having lived with the disease a long time and not liking to take medicines, he learned to lay-low or even check himself into the state hospital rather than mess with the police who he -- quite reasonably -- feared might well kill him.

His behavior got bizaare and unsociable, even hostile and scary ... then he'd disappear .. then he'd be back ...

General Zod, supposedly he took prescription Tylenol *with codeine*. That could change the picture considerably. Can you look that up?

Also, I read one place (can't remember where) that he'd also been drinking, which could accelerate unconsciousness and his subsequent demise as well, I should think.

Thanks for protecting the privacy of your readers.

_lucky_, I posted an almost identical letter a little earlier. I cannot for the life of me figure out why this isn't getting more attention.

I will look it up. I was working under the assumption that the acetaminophen was the more likely culprit - as it is a known toxin to the liver.

People abuse codeine and other opioid medications all the time and the relative amount of codeine in Tylenol #3 is pretty low.

But I'm sure the information is out there regarding this "polydrug overdose"...

At the top of page two of the search warrant affidavit, 7-529-M-1, this assertion is made: 6) Ivins sent an email to [redacted, though later down shows it was a friend] ... a few days before the anthrax attacks warning [redacted] that "Bin Laden terrorists for sure have anthrax and sarin gas" [Then it continues about the death to Israel stuff.]

This is untrue. The first attacks were postmarked on Sept. 18; while the email was dated Sept. 26. Also, the full sentence is "I just heard tonight that Bin Laden terrorists for sure have anthrax and sarin gas." They omitted "I just heard tonight." That completely changes the meaning of the sentence.

The error about the email's timing could be extreme sloppiness. But cutting the phrase?

It is interesting that AP and NYT stories both included these errors as whole stories or as their own stories. They both repeated the false claim that Ivins' email warned that bin Laden had anthrax BEFORE the attacks and both omit "I just heard..." I suspect the FBI press people are pushing that deception. Which again suggests that looking at the evidence might show that other claims are weaker than they first appear.

Excellent point to the person who wrote about the how to pass a polygraph.

One only has to read Ivins' letters archived at FNP to see he supported socially "liberal" positions.

His wife seems to have had a connection to pro-life groups but there is no indication that he did. In fact, the email that is used to try to show that he is anti-choice does the opposite. Go look at where the "but" is placed. There is no there there. Many pro-choice people don't describe themselves as "pro-abortion".

It is also possible that the donations to the AFA were not submitted by Ivins himself but by his wife in their name as part of her own area of advocacy.

(Not to mention, if supporting the AFA makes one a terrorist, the whole American Enterprise Institute must be immediately investigated.)

When they handle, count, or destroy old money at US Mints, it's done by a team of 2.

There's a 2nd key turn needed for nuke launches from subs.

So, why would labs housing lethal materials be vunerable to misuse by a single actor?

How can a colleague self destructively disintegrate so dreadfully, and at a high risk facility, without coworker detection or report?

What will the investigation reveal of misinformations and anthrax alerts given prior to and post 9/11, and their origin and criminality?

Have new protective protocols been adopted to keep other germ warfare antidote concoctors from rogueing into mass villainy?

Is it now FBIed that Ivins cracked in 2001, on his own, and not as a result of becoming a hounded suspect?

Is his medical, physical, social and psychiatric history now in the public domain?

Is this story going to make sense as now given?

What were the prosecutors waiting for- a confession?

Have we moved from conspiracy to tragedy?

Case closed?

When they handle, count, or destroy old money at US Mints, it's done by a team of 2.

There's a 2nd key turn needed for nuke launches from subs.

So, why would labs housing lethal materials be vunerable to misuse by a single actor?

How can a colleague self destructively disintegrate so dreadfully, and at a high risk facility, without coworker detection or report?

What will the investigation reveal of misinformations and anthrax alerts given prior to and post 9/11, and their origin and criminality?

Have new protective protocols been adopted to keep other germ warfare antidote concoctors from rogueing into mass villainy?

Is it now FBIed that Ivins cracked in 2001, on his own, and not as a result of becoming a hounded suspect?

Is his medical, physical, social and psychiatric history now in the public domain?

Is this story going to make sense as now given?

What were the prosecutors waiting for- a confession?

Have we moved from conspiracy to tragedy?

Case closed?

Just to clarify that - it is just that Jim White had been stating that he was an expert scientist who worked with nematodes and bacillus, and had been worried about being interviewed by the FBI at the time of the anthrax attacks.

I simply searched Google Scholar for nematodes and bacillus and came up with a Jim F. White at NIH, Health and Human Services. This came up on another thread, and Jim White immediately replied that he wasn't that Jim White - and as I said there, I was simply asking as it would have been a strange situation, vis-a-vis the imminent anthrax vaccine contract from HHS.

However, I would agree with Glenn Greenwald's comment regarding my previous statement, and I did comply:

You're obviously knowledgeable about many of these issues yet have scrupulously avoided disclosing any information about yourself or any claimed basis for expertise. Ultimately, I assess someone's writing based on how credible I find it to be after evaluating and scrutinizing it.

Through that process, I've found Ed Lake to be quite reliable (though not infallible), but you suggest he should be disregarded on credentialism grounds. If we take your advice, shouldn't we disregard what you say on the same ground?

So, I gave my credentials and name (Ike Solem, and my main credential, for what it's worth, is an NSF Graduate Student Fellowship from 1998-2001, in microbiology). Perhaps Jim White could do the same? Or not. But if you're going to claim some degree of expertise, you should try and back it up a litte bit.

However,I think the problem with Ed Lake isn't so much credentials as it is the technical implausibility of his claims. I'd read all of Richard Preston instead - for a taste of Ed Lake and his attempts to portray the anthrax as a low-tech blend, see this:

http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/coatings.html

Does that really sound that reasonable in the light of all the other evidence I've cited here? It is all published stuff, from reputable authors and journalists, working in the business, and hard to refute.

Ike Solem

ike_solm@hotmail.com