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

[random1323]

Why Wasn’t Ivins Declared an Enemy Combatant?


JACOB G. HORNBERGER
Counterpunch
Friday, Aug 8, 2008

So, the FBI was prepared to indict U.S. Army scientist Bruce Ivins for terrorism before he committed suicide. The specific act of terrorism for which Ivins was to be indicted was employing weapons of mass destruction, to wit: anthrax, on American citizens on American soil.

What?

An indictment?

Doesn’t that mean federal courts? Doesn’t that mean the Bill of Rights? Doesn’t that mean the presumption of innocence, right to counsel, right to be free from self-incrimination, protection from cruel and unusual punishments, right to bail, exclusion of evidence acquired by torture, coercion, or illegal searches, right to confront witnesses, right to summon witnesses, a public trial, and trial by jury?

Is that any way to treat an enemy combatant during time of war? Is that the way we treated German prisoners of war in World War II? Did the feds indict them too?

 

[Willie99]

Why Wasn’t Ivins Declared an Enemy Combatant?


JACOB G. HORNBERGER
Counterpunch
Friday, Aug 8, 2008

So, the FBI was prepared to indict U.S. Army scientist Bruce Ivins for terrorism before he committed suicide. The specific act of terrorism for which Ivins was to be indicted was employing weapons of mass destruction, to wit: anthrax, on American citizens on American soil.

What?

An indictment?

Doesn’t that mean federal courts? Doesn’t that mean the Bill of Rights? Doesn’t that mean the presumption of innocence, right to counsel, right to be free from self-incrimination, protection from cruel and unusual punishments, right to bail, exclusion of evidence acquired by torture, coercion, or illegal searches, right to confront witnesses, right to summon witnesses, a public trial, and trial by jury?

Is that any way to treat an enemy combatant during time of war? Is that the way we treated German prisoners of war in World War II? Did the feds indict them too?

What a wonderful example of a red herring argument.

 

[MichaelScott]

Hearing is supposed to be on Sept 17th in US Congress about the unanswered questions.

 

[DonDotta27]

hey scott, i just read all these threads .. im just wonderin why would the cia kill the scientist?? What would that do in killing him??

 

[MichaelScott]

hey scott, i just read all these threads .. im just wonderin why would the cia kill the scientist?? What would that do in killing him??

I believe it was a select "few". The CIA in the traditional sense of what we know, doesn't know about this. Just a "few" individuals within the CIA that were close to The Bush Family and others that orchestrated this.

So lets just call these people "rogue agents" and not "The CIA" from now on. Do you understand what I am saying?

 

[MichaelScott]

I'm gonna miss her.

All I can say is I brought more people to TheRX than Joe C! It may be one, but still more than Joey.

 

[DonDotta27]

I believe it was a select "few". The CIA in the traditional sense of what we know, doesn't know about this. Just a "few" individuals within the CIA that were close to The Bush Family and others that orchestrated this.

So lets just call these people "rogue agents" and not "The CIA" from now on. Do you understand what I am saying?

I understand but why would they want him dead? so that he cant testify in court that he didn't create the anthrax

 

[MichaelScott]

I understand but why would they want him dead? so that he cant testify in court that he didn't create the anthrax

Bingo!

The less people testifying the better. A cover up if you will.

 

[DonDotta27]

Bingo!

The less people testifying the better. A cover up if you will.

I understand but why do you think the government would do this ?? Im to lazy to read the whole story again i was alot younger when this whole story broke and i forgot all that happened.. If you would liek to give me a summary it would be deeply appreciated !!:lol::nohead:

 

[MichaelScott]

I understand but why do you think the government would do this ?? Im to lazy to read the whole story again i was alot younger when this whole story broke and i forgot all that happened.. If you would liek to give me a summary it would be deeply appreciated !!:lol::nohead:

Here is an update on the 9/17 hearing that went on today. 2 key senators are really questioning the FBI's account. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/17/senate_judiciary/index.html Ivins was murdered as a "fall guy". That is why they did this. Otherwise the entire plan of how Cheney "knew" or "called for the assistance" of a rogue or a few rogue agents to send deadly anthrax letters to key persons and political figures. Dan Rather was probably a retaliation letter for his questioning of the 9/11 attacks. That is probably why he got his anthrax letters.