• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

FBI's Anthrax Media Strategy Explained

Edited by Darat: 
Breach of Rule 4 & Rule 6 removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep, the ABC story sold the war. Still awaiting answers from them.
This still remains the most important question in this whole mess.
 
Toke said:
Christian zionist?
Is that the people breeding a red bull, to be burned to ash.
The story about creating a greater israel, building davids tempel and poured the ash on a priest. He will the summon jesus, start world war 3 and then we all got to hell?

Did i get any of the details wrong?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's one of many crazy projects that DeLay, et al. have funded over the years--all trying to fulfill various biblical and no-so-biblical prophecies so that Jesus can come and kill everyone while they, the only True Christians on the planet, watch and gloat. Lovely people, really--I've always predicted they'd try something like this, but I never expected my CT to be eclipsed by something even crazier...
 
Galileo said:
The FBI killed Dr. Ivins before he could reveal who had planted the evidence agianst him. That is the only explanation consistent with the facts.
Click to expand...


What facts? Is it a fact that Dr. Ivins knew who had "planted the evidence agianst [sic] him"?
 
Galileo said:
Fort Detrick Scientist: Ivins Innocent, FBI Worse Than KGB!
http://www.barrettforcongress.us/
Click to expand...
Except, of course, for the part that what the FBI is alleged to have done once, in this case, the KGB is confirmed to have done regularly, in a vast number of cases. What's more, what the KGB did, everybody in the Soviet Union knew about. They didn't talk about it, though, because the KGB really did persecute dissenters and whistleblowers. And on top of that, there was the whole Iron Curtain, which was an agressive, thorough, and very public program of keeping everybody inside the USSR from telling anybody outside the USSR what was going on.

But other than the limited scope, the lack of confirmation, the public consensus that there's no secret police organization tyrranizing them all day every day, and the free flow of information and people across national borders, yes: The FBI is waaay worse than the KGB.

I have a hard time imagining a guy who sucks this bad at World History could be any good as a scientist either. But I guess the fact that the government actually employs outspoken nutjob dissenters is yet another mark against the FBI=KGB++ theory
 
dudalb said:
If someone in the FBI made a accusation of mass murder without evidence to back it up, he would be in a world of trouble.
I suggest you do the same or lose what little reputation you have here.
Please give me one piece of solid evidence that the FBI killed Ivins. I won't hold my breath.
Click to expand...

Q: If Dr. Bruce Ivins was the anthrax killer, why didn't he kill himself with anthrax?

Huh?
 
theprestige said:
Except, of course, for the part that what the FBI is alleged to have done once, in this case, the KGB is confirmed to have done regularly, in a vast number of cases. What's more, what the KGB did, everybody in the Soviet Union knew about. They didn't talk about it, though, because the KGB really did persecute dissenters and whistleblowers. And on top of that, there was the whole Iron Curtain, which was an agressive, thorough, and very public program of keeping everybody inside the USSR from telling anybody outside the USSR what was going on.

But other than the limited scope, the lack of confirmation, the public consensus that there's no secret police organization tyrranizing them all day every day, and the free flow of information and people across national borders, yes: The FBI is waaay worse than the KGB.

I have a hard time imagining a guy who sucks this bad at World History could be any good as a scientist either. But I guess the fact that the government actually employs outspoken nutjob dissenters is yet another mark against the FBI=KGB++ theory
Click to expand...

you didn't read the article. The scientists who said that lived in the Soviet Union under the KGB.
 
Last edited:
madurobob said:
Why would he? Simply to satisfy your twisted need for poetic exit? Death by OD of pain relievers is a much nicer way to go.
Click to expand...

Well, there was also that whole "he had vaccinated himself against it" thing, too.
Makes it a tad harder to kill yourself with it, I would imagine.
 
Why was Dr. Ivins death not reported for 6 days?

Why didn't he write a suicide note?

Why was there no autopsy?

How do they no the cause of death, if no autopsy?

Why did the FBI lie and say he was a suspect about to be indicted, when he was not a suspect, no draft indictment had been written, and the grand jury hadn't even convened, or was sceduled to convene?

How can someone under 24/7 surveillance commit suicide using a technique that takes two days to kill you?

Why not just take anthrax?

What is the date (month and year) that the FBI determined that the anthrax came from a specified flask in Ivins’s lab ("RMR-1029")?

When (month and year) did the FBI determine that Dr. Hatfill never had access to the anthrax used in the killings?

How did the FBI determine that Dr. Hatfill did not have access to the anthrax used in the killings? Was that because the FBI determined that Dr. Hatfill no longer worked at USAMRIID when the powder was made?

Was Dr. Hatfill or his counsel informed that Dr. Hatfill had been cleared of any involvement in the anthrax killings before the Department of Justice offered a settlement to him? Was he informed before signing the settlement agreement with him? If not, please explain why not.

Was Judge Walton (the judge overseeing the Privacy Act litigation) ever informed that Dr. Hatfill had been eliminated as a suspect in the anthrax killings? If so, when. If not, please explain why not.

Was Dr. Ivins ever polygraphed in the course of the investigation? If so, please provide the dates and results of the exam(s). If not, please explain why not.

Of the more than 100 people who had access to RMR 1029, how many were provided custody of samples sent outside Ft. Detrick? Of those, how many samples were provided to foreign laboratories?

If those with access to samples of RMR 1029 in places other than Ft. Detrick had used the sample to produce additional quantities of anthrax, would that anthrax appear distinguishable from RMR 1029?

How can the FBI be sure that none of the samples sent to other labs were used to create additional quantities of anthrax that would appear distinguishable from RMR 1029?

Please describe the methodology and results of any oxygen isotope measurements taken to determine the source of water used to grow the spores used in the anthrax attacks.

Was there video equipment which would record the activities of Dr. Ivins at Ft. Detrick on the late nights he was there on the dates surrounding the mailings? If so, please describe what examination of the video revealed.

When did the FBI first learn of Dr. Ivins’ late-night activity in the lab around the time of the attacks? If this is powerful circumstantial evidence of his guilt, then why did this information not lead the FBI to focus attention on him, rather than Dr. Hatfill, much sooner in the investigation?

When did the FBI first learn that Dr. Ivins was prescribed medications for various symptoms of mental illness? If this is circumstantial evidence of his guilt, then why did this information not lead the FBI to focus attention on him, rather than Dr. Hatfill, much sooner in the investigation? Of the 100 individuals who had access to RMR 1029, were any others found to suffer from mental illness, be under the care of a mental health professional, or prescribed anti-depressant/anti-psychotic medications? If so, how many?

What role did the FBI play in conducting and updating the background examination of Dr. Ivins in order for him to have clearance and work with deadly pathogens at Ft. Detrick?

After the FBI identified Dr. Ivins as the sole suspect, why was he not detained? Did the U.S. Attorney’s Office object to seeking an arrest or material witness warrant? If not, did anyone at FBI order a slower approach to arresting Ivins?

Had an indictment of Dr. Ivins been drafted before his death? If so, what additional information did it contain beyond the affidavits already released to the public? If not, then when, if ever, had a decision been made to seek an indictment from the grand jury?

According to family members, FBI agents publicly confronted and accused Dr. Ivins of the attacks, showed pictures of the victims to his daughter, and offered the $2.5 million reward to his son in the months leading up to his suicide. These aggressive, overt surveillance techniques appear similar to those used on Dr. Hatfill with the apparent purpose of intimidation rather than legitimate investigation. Please describe whether and to what degree there is any truth to these claims.

What additional documents will be released, if any, and when will they be released?

http://grassley.senate.gov/public/i...f11d-e765-d965-e937adfa47dc&Month=8&Year=2008
 
Galileo said:
Why was Dr. Ivins death not reported for 6 days?

Why didn't he write a suicide note?

Why was there no autopsy?

How do they no the cause of death, if no autopsy?

Why did the FBI lie and say he was a suspect about to be indicted, when he was not a suspect, no draft indictment had been written, and the grand jury hadn't even convened, or was sceduled to convene?

How can someone under 24/7 surveillance commit suicide using a technique that takes two days to kill you?

Why not just take anthrax?
Click to expand...

I'll tackle these to start. Not everyone writes a suicide note. Why do you think it is weird he didn't? What are the numbers for suicides with a note and without a note?

Why is it weird that it wasn't announced? Maybe the family did not want it known yet. Maybe the DoJ/FBI wanted the hospital to wait. Why does this matter?

Autopsies are only performed if the cause of death is unknown. When he was admitted to the hospital they most likely checked his blood to see what was wrong with him and found the drugs in his system. Then, when his organs shutdown according to an overdose of this nature they knew how he died. Not every death gets an autopsy.

How do you know he wasn't about to be indicted? Various news outlets have said that the DoJ was moving forward and getting ready to go to court.

Were there surveillance everywhere? Were agents standing by to make sure he wasn't going to kill himself? Do you think it would be that difficult to scarf down a whole bunch of pills even if the government has people outside your home? Are you saying there were agents with him at every second watching his every move and preventing him from doing anything? They were watching his life and letting it proceed. He wasn't locked up. He could still move around.

Why would he have to take anthrax to kill himself? Why didn't he run the car in the garage? Why didn't he shoot himself as he had a pistol or two? Why didn't he hang himself? There are many ways to kill yourself and slipping into a coma and dying is probably an easy way to go. Why is this an oddity?
 
Last edited:
van_dutch said:
Why would he have to take anthrax to kill himself? Why didn't he run the car in the garage? Why didn't he shoot himself as he had a pistol or two? Why didn't he hang himself? There are many ways to kill yourself and slipping into a coma and dying is probably an easy way to go. Why is this an oddity?
Click to expand...


Yeah there are some legitimate questions about this whole case, but "why didn't he choose an especially horrible way to die?" is not one of them.
 
Why do the FBI have to be part of a nefarius conspirary, can´t they just be clueless and looking for an easy solution to the case. :confused:
 
van_dutch said:
I'll tackle these to start. Not everyone writes a suicide note. Why do you think it is weird he didn't? What are the numbers for suicides with a note and without a note?

Why is it weird that it wasn't announced? Maybe the family did not want it known yet. Maybe the DoJ/FBI wanted the hospital to wait. Why does this matter?

Autopsies are only performed if the cause of death is unknown. When he was admitted to the hospital they most likely checked his blood to see what was wrong with him and found the drugs in his system. Then, when his organs shutdown according to an overdose of this nature they knew how he died. Not every death gets an autopsy.

How do you know he wasn't about to be indicted? Various news outlets have said that the DoJ was moving forward and getting ready to go to court.

Were there surveillance everywhere? Were agents standing by to make sure he wasn't going to kill himself? Do you think it would be that difficult to scarf down a whole bunch of pills even if the government has people outside your home? Are you saying there were agents with him at every second watching his every move and preventing him from doing anything? They were watching his life and letting it proceed. He wasn't locked up. He could still move around.

Why would he have to take anthrax to kill himself? Why didn't he run the car in the garage? Why didn't he shoot himself as he had a pistol or two? Why didn't he hang himself? There are many ways to kill yourself and slipping into a coma and dying is probably an easy way to go. Why is this an oddity?
Click to expand...

Ivins attorney says he is still not listed as a suspect, the grand jury never met, no draft indictment was written, and no one can guarantee an indictment, the grand jury decides that.

As for your other questions, when they are answered, then I'll believe it was a suicide. As of now, the cause of death is unknown.
 
Toke said:
Why do the FBI have to be part of a nefarius conspirary, can´t they just be clueless and looking for an easy solution to the case. :confused:
Click to expand...

what conspiracy are you talking about? I didn't know you were a conspiracy theorist?
 
Galileo said:
As for your other questions, when they are answered, then I'll believe it was a suicide. As of now, the cause of death is unknown.
Click to expand...

Why don't you start by answering them. Please enlighten me. Why is this method of suicide so improbable? Why did he need a note? Why did he need an autopsy if the cause of death was apparent? There are some legitimate questions to be asked about the potential of FBI bullying that resulted in this situation. The cause of death has been established. Why is this suicide stranger than any other? Is there a form that one has to fill out when committing suicide that I am not aware of? You seem to be speaking authoritatively about suicide. Please tell how it should have been done.
 
Last edited:
van_dutch said:
Why don't you start by answering them. Please enlighten me. Why is this method of suicide so improbable? Why did he need a note? Why did he need an autopsy if the cause of death was apparent? There are some legitimate questions to be asked about the potential of FBI bullying that resulted in this situation. The cause of death has been established. Why is this suicide stranger than any other? Is there a form that one has to fill out when committing suicide that I am not aware of? You seem to be speaking authoritatively about suicide. Please tell how it should have been done.
Click to expand...

I started this thread, remember? That means I ask the questions and you answer the questions.

Why did Ivins kill himself before he was indicted? They say he said he was going to shoot his co-workers if he was indicted. Well, now he can't do that, even if he is indicted, because he's dead.

That means he either didn't say he was going to shoot his co-workers, or he didn't committ suicide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom