Dr. Bruce Ivins, anthrax scientist was murdered by The CIA

[MichaelScott]

they orginially tied to pin it down on islamic terrorists specifically iraq we have "our leaders" including mccain on video saying such things

once they actually sampled the anthrax (not all anthrax is the same) only clear link was to government labs

so its either somebody inside did it on their own doing for whatever reason tried to pin down hasliff for 6 years....than in 1 month they went after this ivin guy....or government carried it out themselves....

the source of the anthrax seems pretty clear from what i read....just a matter of who did it and why

gave government more reason to rush through the patriot act with little or no discussion as well

See my previous post tiz. One of the letters had Betonite, which is a chemical additive only known to be used in Iraq for biological weapons manufacturing. One of the intentions was to pin this on Iraq. Only The CIA itself, not some nerdy scientist, would know from intel reports and classified material to put that additive in The Anthrax Laced letters, to plce blame on Iraq. That is why in 2001, John McCain stated on television, "That early reports indicate that at least one of these letters may be linked to Iraq".


From wikipedia:

In late October, 2001, ABC chief investigative correspondent Brian RossSaddam Hussein; on October 26, "sources tell ABCNEWS the anthrax in the tainted letter sent to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle was laced with bentonite. several times linked the anthrax sample to The potent additive is known to have been used by only one country in producing biochemical weapons — Iraq.... it is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program...The discovery of bentonite came in an urgent series of tests conducted at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and elsewhere," <sup id="cite_ref-14" class="reference">[15]


Each letter had different additives to be found. Read the Wikipedia Article on the Anthrax Letters. This is how you link the CIA to mailing the letters out. In fact, Wikipedia has openly stated they have blocked Department of Defense computers from their site because of altering pages with not cited sources and inaccuracies.

</sup>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentonite
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax_letters

 

[JoeContrarian]

What this clown doesn't realize (because he isn't on the inside) is how many people in the CIA, State Dept and other agencies DESPISE the Bush administration and have been undermining the war effort from the very beginning. Valerie Plame is one example but there are other cases which haven't yet reached the same profile.

The stuff Michael Scott is posting isn't fit for a Michael Moore or Oliver Stone script. :missingte

 

[MichaelScott]

Wikiscanner, how the CIA will eventually edit post in Wikipedia

For misinformation and information warfare, the CIA will eventually start editing posts as they have done in the past. WikiScanner is a good tool to see, who (by IP Address and possibly organization) is editing the articles you are reading. The DoD is known to have attempted to change the page on the Iraq War many times from .mil domains.

The fact of the matter is 250 Million Americans are smarter than the few CIA crooks doing this, so eventually the truth gets out.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiScanner

According to Wired, which first broke the story, most edits are "fairly innocuous".<sup id="cite_ref-Wired2_6-0" class="reference">[7]</sup> Wired asked users to submit "The most shameful Wikipedia spin jobs",<sup id="cite_ref-Wired_7-0" class="reference">[8]</sup> which has generated many news stories about organizations, such as the Al-Jazeera network, Fox News Channel, staffers of Democratic Senator Robert Byrd and the CIA, that have edited Wikipedia articles.


Wikipedia co-founder[24] Jimmy Wales spoke enthusiastically about WikiScanner:

"It's awesome—I love it … It brings an additional level of transparency to what's going on at Wikipedia … [WikiScanner] uses information we've been making publicly available forever, hoping someone would do something like this."[25]

 

[tiznow]

here's another weak connection

a lyopholizer is a very heavy piece of equipment only way to move them by yourself would be on a cart and its very noisy when using as it uses a vacuum pump to dry the samples....and also you need liquid nitrogen to freeze dry the samples prior to putting them in equipment as you want to hyper freeze the samples....

maybe they make smaller ones i dunno....but the top is a huge chunk of metal with a huge cooling coil running in the middle

i've used a lyopholizer on many occasions

------------------------------------

Anthrax Dryer a Key To Probe
Suspect Borrowed Device From Lab


By Carrie Johnson, Joby Warrick and Marilyn W. Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, August 5, 2008; Page A01

Bruce E. Ivins, the government's leading suspect in the 2001 anthrax killings, borrowed freeze-drying equipment from a bioweapons lab that fall that allows scientists to quickly convert wet germ cultures into dry spores, according to sources briefed on the case.

Ivins's possession of the drying equipment, known as a lyopholizer, could help investigators explain how he may have been able to send letters containing deadly anthrax spores to U.S. senators and news organizations, causing five deaths.

The device was not commonly used by researchers at the Army's sprawling biodefense complex at Fort Detrick, Md., where Ivins worked as a scientist, employees at the base said. Instead, sources said, Ivins had to go through a formal process to check out the lyopholizer, creating a record on which authorities are now relying. He did at least one project for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that would have given him reason to use the drying equipment, according to a former colleague in his lab.

As authorities in Washington debated yesterday how to close the long investigation of Ivins, who committed suicide last week -- a step that would signal they think no one else is culpable in the anthrax attacks -- more details began to emerge about the nature of the case they developed against him.

In recent months, investigators have collected a series of circumstantial building blocks in an effort to establish Ivins's alleged role in the attacks, which traumatized the nation and prompted stringent mail-handling policies. Letters containing the anthrax spores killed five people, including two D.C.-area postal workers, and sickened 17 others.

Scientific analysis helped researchers pinpoint the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases as the likely source of the powder, which was the Ames strain of anthrax bacteria used in various projects at Fort Detrick. Further testing allowed them to narrow down the age of the substance, concluding that it had been cultivated no more than two years before the attacks.

Eventually, through more elaborate DNA testing of the power and tissue cultures from the victims, they determined that the powder probably came from supplies made by Ivins, to which about 10 other people had access. Authorities last week cited "new and sophisticated scientific tools" that helped advance the investigation.

Ivins was not charged before his death July 29. Paul F. Kemp, his attorney, has repeatedly asserted Ivins's innocence, and colleagues and friends say government officials fixed on the wrong man in a race to close a seven-year investigation rife with dead ends and missteps. They also note that other U.S. scientists had access to some of the same material and equipment that authorities apparently used to focus on Ivins.

The lyopholizer Ivins used in the fall of 2001 is commonly employed by pharmaceutical companies and laboratories as well as food processors to freeze a liquid broth of bacteria and quickly transform it into a dry solid without a thawing stage.

Scientists and biodefense experts familiar with USAMRIID's procedures say that Ivins's department rarely used such freeze dryers, because the researchers there worked with anthrax bacteria in a liquid form.

"Dry anthrax is much harder to work with," said one scientist familiar with Ivins's lab. A lyopholizer would fit inside the ventilated "biosafety cabinet" at the lab and could have been used without drawing notice, the scientist said. The machine could have processed a few small batches of anthrax liquid in less than a day, he said.

Other biodefense experts noted that the drying step could have been carried out with equipment no more complicated than a kitchen oven. "It is the simplest . . . but it is the least reproducible," said Sergei Popov, a former Soviet bioweapons scientist who now specializes in biodefense at George Mason University. "If you go too fast you get 'sand,' " he said, referring to the coarser anthrax powder used in the first attacks, in September 2001.

The second batch of letters contained a much finer powder. "To me, it all indicates that the person experimented with the ways to dry the spores, and produced small batches -- some of them not so successfully -- he later used to fill up different envelopes," Popov said. "The spores are naturally clumpy. As I understand, he just over-baked the first batches."

Many of the key documents that would have supported the prosecution of Ivins could be unveiled later this week after Justice Department and FBI officials meet with families of the anthrax victims. Authorities were contacting relatives yesterday and seeking a time to meet.

Investigators have been wrong before about who may have perpetrated the attacks. In June, the Justice Department agreed to pay Steven J. Hatfill, a former Fort Detrick researcher once labeled a "person of interest" in the case, a $5.8 million settlement to forgo a privacy lawsuit.

Significant mysteries remain, including whether the attacks that involved letters mailed from Florida and Princeton, N.J., could have been carried out by one person. And many questions remain about Ivins.

Safety officials and lawmakers have wondered how the scientist was able to maintain his security clearance despite emotional problems that led Jean C. Duley, a therapist, to seek a protective order against him last month.

The Army issued final rules last week that would cover workers who act in an aggressive or threatening manner. Those employees would be denied access to toxic or lethal biological agents under the revised regulations. Other potentially disqualifying personality traits include: "arrogance, inflexibility, suspiciousness, hostility . . . and extreme moods or mood swings," according to the document.

A spokeswoman for USAMRIID said Fort Detrick had been operating under interim rules covering the same behavior for some time.

 

[MichaelScott]

here's another weak connection

a lyopholizer is a very heavy piece of equipment only way to move them by yourself would be on a cart and its very noisy when using as it uses a vacuum pump to dry the samples....and also you need liquid nitrogen to freeze dry the samples prior to putting them in equipment as you want to hyper freeze the samples....

maybe they make smaller ones i dunno....but the top is a huge chunk of metal with a huge cooling coil running in the middle

i've used a lyopholizer on many occasions

------------------------------------

Anthrax Dryer a Key To Probe
Suspect Borrowed Device From Lab


By Carrie Johnson, Joby Warrick and Marilyn W. Thompson
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, August 5, 2008; Page A01

Bruce E. Ivins, the government's leading suspect in the 2001 anthrax killings, borrowed freeze-drying equipment from a bioweapons lab that fall that allows scientists to quickly convert wet germ cultures into dry spores, according to sources briefed on the case.

Ivins's possession of the drying equipment, known as a lyopholizer, could help investigators explain how he may have been able to send letters containing deadly anthrax spores to U.S. senators and news organizations, causing five deaths.

The device was not commonly used by researchers at the Army's sprawling biodefense complex at Fort Detrick, Md., where Ivins worked as a scientist, employees at the base said. Instead, sources said, Ivins had to go through a formal process to check out the lyopholizer, creating a record on which authorities are now relying. He did at least one project for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that would have given him reason to use the drying equipment, according to a former colleague in his lab.

As authorities in Washington debated yesterday how to close the long investigation of Ivins, who committed suicide last week -- a step that would signal they think no one else is culpable in the anthrax attacks -- more details began to emerge about the nature of the case they developed against him.

In recent months, investigators have collected a series of circumstantial building blocks in an effort to establish Ivins's alleged role in the attacks, which traumatized the nation and prompted stringent mail-handling policies. Letters containing the anthrax spores killed five people, including two D.C.-area postal workers, and sickened 17 others.

Scientific analysis helped researchers pinpoint the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases as the likely source of the powder, which was the Ames strain of anthrax bacteria used in various projects at Fort Detrick. Further testing allowed them to narrow down the age of the substance, concluding that it had been cultivated no more than two years before the attacks.

Eventually, through more elaborate DNA testing of the power and tissue cultures from the victims, they determined that the powder probably came from supplies made by Ivins, to which about 10 other people had access. Authorities last week cited "new and sophisticated scientific tools" that helped advance the investigation.

Ivins was not charged before his death July 29. Paul F. Kemp, his attorney, has repeatedly asserted Ivins's innocence, and colleagues and friends say government officials fixed on the wrong man in a race to close a seven-year investigation rife with dead ends and missteps. They also note that other U.S. scientists had access to some of the same material and equipment that authorities apparently used to focus on Ivins.

The lyopholizer Ivins used in the fall of 2001 is commonly employed by pharmaceutical companies and laboratories as well as food processors to freeze a liquid broth of bacteria and quickly transform it into a dry solid without a thawing stage.

Scientists and biodefense experts familiar with USAMRIID's procedures say that Ivins's department rarely used such freeze dryers, because the researchers there worked with anthrax bacteria in a liquid form.

"Dry anthrax is much harder to work with," said one scientist familiar with Ivins's lab. A lyopholizer would fit inside the ventilated "biosafety cabinet" at the lab and could have been used without drawing notice, the scientist said. The machine could have processed a few small batches of anthrax liquid in less than a day, he said.

Other biodefense experts noted that the drying step could have been carried out with equipment no more complicated than a kitchen oven. "It is the simplest . . . but it is the least reproducible," said Sergei Popov, a former Soviet bioweapons scientist who now specializes in biodefense at George Mason University. "If you go too fast you get 'sand,' " he said, referring to the coarser anthrax powder used in the first attacks, in September 2001.

The second batch of letters contained a much finer powder. "To me, it all indicates that the person experimented with the ways to dry the spores, and produced small batches -- some of them not so successfully -- he later used to fill up different envelopes," Popov said. "The spores are naturally clumpy. As I understand, he just over-baked the first batches."

Many of the key documents that would have supported the prosecution of Ivins could be unveiled later this week after Justice Department and FBI officials meet with families of the anthrax victims. Authorities were contacting relatives yesterday and seeking a time to meet.

Investigators have been wrong before about who may have perpetrated the attacks. In June, the Justice Department agreed to pay Steven J. Hatfill, a former Fort Detrick researcher once labeled a "person of interest" in the case, a $5.8 million settlement to forgo a privacy lawsuit.

Significant mysteries remain, including whether the attacks that involved letters mailed from Florida and Princeton, N.J., could have been carried out by one person. And many questions remain about Ivins.

Safety officials and lawmakers have wondered how the scientist was able to maintain his security clearance despite emotional problems that led Jean C. Duley, a therapist, to seek a protective order against him last month.

The Army issued final rules last week that would cover workers who act in an aggressive or threatening manner. Those employees would be denied access to toxic or lethal biological agents under the revised regulations. Other potentially disqualifying personality traits include: "arrogance, inflexibility, suspiciousness, hostility . . . and extreme moods or mood swings," according to the document.

A spokeswoman for USAMRIID said Fort Detrick had been operating under interim rules covering the same behavior for some time.

Good post Tiz. Thank You.

The CIA is working overtime tonight in the information warfare department I would imagine. They have a lot of "breaking news" to send to the media tomorrow.

 

[tiznow]

also just a general note

these guys are microbiologists

why in the world would a guy use a strain directly coming from his lab....he has to know there is a very good potential it can be traced back to his lab at some point

 

[tiznow]

i mean i know my spelling is bad

but this duley character can't even spell therapist....spelled it "theripist"

also why wait till the 24th when its says homicidal suicidal thoughts on the 9th"

anyway should be very interesting to see more details in the coming days

here's the back of the form where she spells therapist wrong....


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax2.html

 

[JoeContrarian]

i mean i know my spelling is bad

but this duley character can't even spell therapist....spelled it "theripist"

Prob a Muslim.

 

[tiznow]

this duley character is claiming alot of shit

mental problems as far back as 2000 he tried to murder people and poison them??....

and what about this forensically diagnosed as a sociopathic killer stuff

revenge killer revenge for what????

also i wonder if any of these "group therapy session" people step up and back up her claims....if they even exist

as for him calling her and threatening her i'd do the same fucking thing if i thought i was being framed....

she is working with the feds by this july 24th question is when did the feds and her first come in contact?

audio link at the end

---------------------------------------------------

Raw Audiotape: Ivins was a psychotic "revenge killer"

In a chilling audiotape, a former therapist of anthrax-case suspect Dr. Bruce Ivins warns a Maryland judge that Ivins is a psychotic "revenge killer" who boasted of buying a gun and killing his co-workers.

The New York Times obtained the audiotape of a court hearing in which therapist Jean Duley told a judge that she feared for her life. She testifies that, at a July 9 group-therapy session, Ivins announced that he had bought a gun and a bulletproof vest and was plotting to kill his co-workers at the Fort Detrick Army research laboratory.

“He was going to go out in a blaze of glory, that he was going to take everybody out with him,” Duley said. The tape, released to the Times by the Maryland District Court in Frederick, is a recording of the recent hearing at which Duley successfully sought a restraining order against Dr. Ivins.


Revenge killer:
“He is a revenge killer,” Ms. Duley told a Maryland District Court judge on the tape. “When he feels that he has been slighted, and especially towards women, he plots and actually tries to carry out revenge killings.”

Duley ran group-therapy sessions, and Dr. Ivins was a patient. She said on the tape that she had been cooperating with the FBI in its anthrax investigation and was planning to testify against Ivins before a federal grand jury.

She said that on July 9 Dr. Ivins showed up at the group session in Frederick and was "extremely agitated and out of control." He then described a "long and detailed homicidal plan" regarding his co-workers, Duley said. He also revealed that "he had been roaming the streets of Frederick trying to pick a fight" with a stranger so that he could stab him.

Duley called the FBI and other officials after the troubling group session, and helped have Ivins committed to a mental hospital. She said that Ivins then began calling her, from the hospital, and left threatening messages at 4 in the morning. Ivins was "ranting" and "thanked me for ruining his life" and for enabling the FBI to prosecute him for the anthrax murders.

Duley also told the judge that Ivins had mental problems that began in 2000, when he "attempted to murder several other people" through "poisoning." She didn't elaborate, and NBC News has not been able to locate any old criminal charges against Ivins.

"He has been forensically diagnosed...as a sociopathic homicidal killer," Duley added. "I'm scared to death," she said.

The judge quickly agreed to Duley's request, and ordered Ivins to stay away from his former therapist. Ivins was later released from the mental hospital, and killed himself days later.

Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2008 1:35 PM ET
Filed Under: Terrorism
By Jim Popkin, NBC News Senior Investigative Producer

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=2d7_1217728280

 

[Willie99]

I see those who who calling me "luney" previously have become silent and avoided posting counter arguments or evidence that I am wrong. I like that.

or maybe we're just totally bored by the subject and we're waiting for facts, as opposed to accusations.

I think "your facts" are weakly connected, I think your presumptive motive is questionable, your overall argument just doesn't pass the smell test for me and I'm not from the big bad conspiracy that the whole world ignores school of thought to begin with.

I'll let time do it's thing.

 

[random1323]

willie, stop fooling yourself. your old "time doing it's thing" is your way of waiting for someone else to tell what to think.

 

[Willie99]

Apologies for being off topic and I will not get into a back and forth on this. However, this MUST be said:

Willie99 is skeptical of someone's post because they did not cite their source. That is true irony.

How hard would it be for me to find a thread where Willie99 did practically the same thing? Would it take more than 5 seconds or less than 5 seconds?

Shorty, understanding relevance just not one of your strengths.

Posting a ranking of scientists that were killed thus proving some off the wall conspiracy argument? citation absolutely necessary.

Posting an article that shows there are differing opinions with respect to a case? especially when the article cites specific cases the attorneys were involved in? not even close to the level of significance. Unless of course, you don't believe there are two sides to every story.

We have different standards of evidence & relevance.

 

[Willie99]

willie, stop fooling yourself. your old "time doing it's thing" is your way of waiting for someone else to tell what to think.

Actually random, I was being kind. Time usually proves bullshit to be bullshit, although the bullshitters will always be in denial blaming it all on some divine interference.

 

[MichaelScott]

or maybe we're just totally bored by the subject and we're waiting for facts, as opposed to accusations.

I think "your facts" are weakly connected, I think your presumptive motive is questionable, your overall argument just doesn't pass the smell test for me and I'm not from the big bad conspiracy that the whole world ignores school of thought to begin with.

I'll let time do it's thing.

Willie,

I used to think like you. I used to shut out all those who came up with these whacky ideas that the government would kill its own people. Then I read a few books and a few documents related to history and how similar humans think and how they take one idea and slowly morph it into another without changing the original idea too much. If governments of the past have killed their own people, both secretly and publically, do you think the United States could be around for nearly 300 years as a country with no killing of its people as well?

You can gain a vast amount of knowledge about how the OSS was started, then it branch out of the DoD into its own organization called the CIA, and why a spy organization was created and how it quickly became abused. There are many free literary sources for that.

You can follow your plan to "let time do its thing" but ultimately if enough people don't jump on bored with this it will quickly be swept under the rug and the innocent people that died will never truly seek closure.

Physical NO SHIT evidence is believable. Providing NO PROOF is not.

Today, Robin Meade on CNN reported "Breaking News" again, which we all know is fed from government sources in the CIA. The news story is that Dr. Bruce Ivins had a post office box under an assumed name, had a subscription to porno sent there, and an addiction to sorority girls. Willie, you are smart... how is this relevant to proving Dr. Bruce Ivins is the perp? Why do I care if he "secretly liked porn"? I watch porn, does that make me a murderer?

The reason that "breaking news" was released by CNN is because the CIA fed the story to them, which will do two things
1. Boost CNN's viewership, which makes CNN happy
2. Starts the demonizing for a smear campaign that Dr. Bruce Ivins was a "very very very naughty naughty bad boy".

Don't be naive willie.

Dr. Bruce Ivins had to do a periodic reinvestigation for his clearance, which entails filling out the SF86 again, and updating any new information. Then investigators for his clearance would have found something. A Top Secret Clearance is good for only 5 years, so if he worked for the DoD for 15 years he had 3 separate re investigations. Furthermore, he probably had at least a CI Poly which asks questions under polygraph like, "Would you do anything to harm United States Citizens" if he didn't do the CI Poly he did the Lifestyle Poly, which asks even MORE intrusive questions like, "Do you have anal sex with your wife?", "Do you buy porno magazines?", etc. How did he pass a polygraph and at the very least 3 background investigations over the course of his career and manage to be a "lone guy who mailed out anthrax laced letter from three (3) separate location?"

The CIA knows he passed all these tests and is a solid stand up guy, but Americans know ABSOLUTELY nothing about security clearances or polygraphs, or espionage so when Robin Meade reports it on CNN, they believe it is true. Don't just take my word on this, my knowledge of all this surpasses probably most peoples here. I am only asking the readers who really think Dr. Ivins committed suicide, to spend a day reading the counter arguments the media is shoving down your throat.

Americans died, and to sweep this under the rug as if one DEAD person did this is an insult to America intelligence and our way of life.

 

[Willie99]

Stuff like what was reported on CNN this morning means nothing, but that's the media. Here's where we tend to disagree, you think it's evidence of a cover up, I think it's just the brain dead media piling on. It's probably true, doesn't prove anything and will never be used in court.

 

[MichaelScott]

Actually random, I was being kind. Time usually proves bullshit to be bullshit, although the bullshitters will always be in denial blaming it all on some divine interference.

Yes it does... Lets review that bullshit from the media.

1. Therapist claims Dr. Ivins was crazy lunatic and wanted to kill co-workers.

The public didn't bite on this when the accuser had a DUI, domestic violence past, and potentially used drugs as was caught with drug paraphenalia.

So, the media "found" another story (which for those who are not informed was from the CIA itself)

2. Breaking Bews! DNA evidence links scientist to flask!

The scientific community and co-workers counted, "wow, how hard would it be for one of our fellow coworkers to get hold of my sample? We are scientists, you think it is that hard?"

So the media backs down and retracts that story...

Then,

3. Breaking News! Post office box rented was under an "Assume Name" Ivins used and he had a porno subscription and stalked sorority girls!

This is highly unbelievable and the public will discredit this one too. Who can get a Top Secret clearance or possible pass a Lifestyle/Counter Intelligence Polygraph if they use assumed names, have porn fetishes, and stalk sorority girls?'

The third BOGUS news release that the CIA provided is the most DESPERATE of them all. They are reallly fishing without bait, just thrwing the fucking hook in the water.



ALL the news reports (that were provided by the CIA and release by the news agencies) are BOGUS.

The FBI is onboard with these "Latest Developments" as well because if they don't close this weak case, they will be exposed for the phonies they are. Even with domestic spying laws enabled (Patriot Act) the Feds both CIA and FBI can't provide ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE. I hear the shit on the news, but I am not seeing anything.

 

[Willie99]

So when did I make or cite those statements again?

And, what's the difference between those accusations and "your accusations".

They all carry very little weight to me.

 

[MichaelScott]

Stuff like what was reported on CNN this morning means nothing, but that's the media. Here's where we tend to disagree, you think it's evidence of a cover up, I think it's just the brain dead media piling on. It's probably true, doesn't prove anything and will never be used in court.

Willie,

I like two thins about you:

1. You question things others write or say (me for an example)
2. And you listen to what others have to say or read

Those are key to knowledge and learning.

So why are Americans automatically writing Dr. Bruce Ivins off as the person(s) who did this? Some who have responded have called him a "serial killer" or "psycho" or "the anthrax letter mailer". There is know evidence so we must present the situation with caution.

My theory that the CIA whacked Dr. Bruce Ivins comes from the belief, with overwhelming evidence of motive and means, that the CIA mailed out the anthrax letters. In that think that the CIA mailed out the letters, one can only think they (The CIA) killed Dr. Ivins in order to make him "the fall guy".


The truth will never come out Willie, they will smear and demonize Br. Ivins like they did so many others... Steven Hatfill, Richard Jewel, etc. When the government has no case, they look for a fall guy because if they can't find out the perputrator they look bad and what good is us paying taxes for something that won't protect us?

 

[MichaelScott]

S
They all carry very little weight to me.

But not to others. Especially those who have read this thread from Post #1

 

[cutacrossshorty]

Shorty, understanding relevance just not one of your strengths.

Posting a ranking of scientists that were killed thus proving some off the wall conspiracy argument? citation absolutely necessary.

Posting an article that shows there are differing opinions with respect to a case? especially when the article cites specific cases the attorneys were involved in? not even close to the level of significance. Unless of course, you don't believe there are two sides to every story.

We have different standards of evidence & relevance.

[Note: Apologies for more off topic stuff. This will be my only response regarding this.]

I believe that whenever anyone takes some text or a chart or whatever from another source, they need to cite that source or provide the link. For some reason (in a recent thread) Willie99 chose not to do that. This was pointed out and he was then given ample opportunity to do so on more than 1 occasion and still did nothing. Then he comes into this thread telling someone that their post should be viewed as non-credible since they didn't provide a link.

I call that hypocritical, not to mention ironic.