News & Supplemental  

The Anthrax Attacks Were NOT the Work of a “Lone Nut”

Com­ment: the FBI has dis­proved its own the­ory about the 2001 anthrax attacks.

“The Anthrax Attacks Remain Unsolved” by Edward Jay Epstein; The Wall Street Jour­nal; 1/25/2010; p. A19.

The inves­ti­ga­tion of the 2001 anthrax attacks ended as far as the pub­lic knew on July 29, 2008, with the death of Bruce Ivins, a senior biode­fense researcher at the U.S. Army Med­ical Research Insti­tute of Infec­tious Dis­eases (USAMRIID) in Fort Det­rick, Md. The cause of death was an over­dose of the painkiller Tylenol. No autopsy was per­formed, and there was no sui­cide note.

Less than a week after his appar­ent sui­cide, the FBI declared Ivins to have been the sole per­pe­tra­tor of the 2001 Anthrax attacks, and the per­son who mailed deadly anthrax spores to NBC, the New York Post, and Sens. Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy. These attacks killed five peo­ple, closed down a Sen­ate office build­ing, caused a national panic, and nearly par­a­lyzed the postal system.

The FBI’s six-year inves­ti­ga­tion was the largest inquest in its his­tory, involv­ing 9,000 inter­views, 6,000 sub­poe­nas, and the exam­i­na­tion of tens of thou­sands of pho­to­copiers, type­writ­ers, com­put­ers and mail­boxes. Yet it failed to find a shred of evi­dence that iden­ti­fied the anthrax killer—or even a wit­ness to the mail­ings. With the help of a task force of sci­en­tists, it found a flask of anthrax that closely matched—through its genetic markers—the anthrax used in the attack.

This flask had been in the cus­tody of Ivins, who had pub­lished no fewer than 44 sci­en­tific papers over three decades as a micro­bi­ol­o­gist and who was work­ing on devel­op­ing vac­cines against anthrax. As cus­to­dian, he pro­vided sam­ples of it to other sci­en­tists at Fort Det­rick, the Bat­telle Memo­r­ial Insti­tute in Colum­bus, Ohio, and other facil­i­ties involved in anthrax research.

Accord­ing to the FBI’s reck­on­ing, over 100 sci­en­tists had been given access to it. Any of these sci­en­tists (or their co-workers) could have stolen a minute quan­tity of this anthrax and, by mix­ing it into a media of water and nutri­ents, used it to grow enough spores to launch the anthrax attacks.
Con­se­quently, Ivins, who was assist­ing the FBI with its inves­ti­ga­tion, as well as all the sci­en­tists who had access to the anthrax, became sus­pects in the inves­ti­ga­tion. They were intensely ques­tioned, given poly­graph exam­i­na­tions, and played off against one another in vari­a­tions of the prisoner’s dilemma game. Their labs, com­put­ers, phones, homes and per­sonal effects were scru­ti­nized for pos­si­ble clues.

As the so-called Amerithrax inves­ti­ga­tion pro­ceeded, the FBI ran into frus­trat­ing dead ends, such as its relent­less five-year pur­suit of Steven Hat­fill, which ended with an apol­ogy in 2007 and Mr. Hat­fill receiv­ing a $5.8 mil­lion set­tle­ment from the U.S. gov­ern­ment as com­pen­sa­tion. Another sci­en­tist, Perry Mike­sell, became so stressed by the FBI’s games that he began to drink heav­ily and died of a heart attack in Octo­ber 2002.

Even­tu­ally, the FBI zeroed in on Ivins. Not only did he have access to the anthrax, but FBI agents sus­pected he had sub­tly mis­led them into their Hat­fill fiasco. A search of his email turned up pornog­ra­phy and bizarre emails which, though unre­lated to anthrax, sug­gested that he was a deeply dis­turbed individual.

The FBI turned the pres­sure up on him, iso­lat­ing him at work and forc­ing him to spend what lit­tle money he had on lawyers to defend him­self. He became increas­ingly stressed. His ther­a­pist reported that Ivins seemed obsessed with the notion of revenge and even homi­cide. Then came his sui­cide (which, as Eric Nadler and Bob Coen show in their doc­u­men­tary “The Anthrax War,” was one of four sui­cides among Amer­i­can and British biowar­fare researchers in past years). Since Ivins’s odd behav­ior closely fit the FBI’s pro­file of the mad sci­en­tist it had been hunt­ing, his sui­cide pro­vided an oppor­tu­nity to close the case. So it held a con­gres­sional brief­ing in which it all but pro­nounced Ivins the anthrax killer.

But there was still a vex­ing problem—silicon.

Sil­i­con was used in the 1960s to weaponize anthrax. Through an elab­o­rate process, anthrax spores were coated with the sub­stance to pre­vent them from cling­ing together so as to cre­ate a lethal aerosol. But since weaponiza­tion was banned by inter­na­tional treaties, research anthrax no longer con­tains sil­i­con, and the flask at Fort Det­rick con­tained none.
Yet the anthrax grown from it had sil­i­con, accord­ing to the U.S. Armed Forces Insti­tute of Pathol­ogy. This sil­i­con explained why, when the let­ters to Sens. Leahy and Daschle were opened, the anthrax vapor­ized into an aerosol. If so, then some­how sil­i­con was added to the anthrax. But Ivins, no mat­ter how weird he may have been, had nei­ther the set of skills nor the means to attach sil­i­con to anthrax spores.

At a min­i­mum, such a process would require highly spe­cial­ized equip­ment that did not exist in Ivins’s lab—or, for that mat­ter, any­where at the Fort Det­rick facil­ity. As Richard Spertzel, a for­mer biode­fense sci­en­tist who worked with Ivins, explained in a pri­vate brief­ing on Jan. 7, 2009, the lab didn’t even deal with anthrax in pow­dered form, adding, “I don’t think there’s any­one there who would have the fog­gi­est idea how to do it.” So while Ivins’s death pro­vided a con­ve­nient fall guy, the sil­i­con con­tent still needed to be explained.

The FBI’s answer was that the anthrax con­tained only traces of sil­i­con, and those, it the­o­rized, could have been acci­dently absorbed by the spores from the water and nutri­ent in which they were grown. No such nutri­ents were ever found in Ivins’s lab, nor, for that mat­ter, did any­one ever see Ivins attempt to pro­duce any unau­tho­rized anthrax (a process which would have involved him using scores of flasks.) But since no one knew what nutri­ents had been used to grow the attack anthrax, it was at least pos­si­ble that they had traces of sil­i­con in them that acci­dently con­t­a­m­i­nated the anthrax.

Nat­ural con­t­a­m­i­na­tion was an ele­gant the­ory that ran into prob­lems after Con­gress­man Jerry Nadler pressed FBI Direc­tor Robert Mueller in Sep­tem­ber 2008 to pro­vide the House Judi­ciary Com­mit­tee with a miss­ing piece of data: the pre­cise per­cent­age of sil­i­con con­tained in the anthrax used in the attacks.

The answer came seven months later on April 17, 2009. Accord­ing to the FBI lab, 1.4% of the pow­der in the Leahy let­ter was sil­i­con. “This is a shock­ingly high pro­por­tion,” explained Stu­art Jacob­son, an expert in small par­ti­cle chem­istry. “It is a num­ber one would expect from the delib­er­ate weaponiza­tion of anthrax, but not from any con­ceiv­able acci­den­tal contamination.”

Nev­er­the­less, in an attempt to back up its the­ory, the FBI con­tracted sci­en­tists at the Lawrence Liv­er­more National Labs in Cal­i­for­nia to con­duct exper­i­ments in which anthrax is acci­dently absorbed from a media heav­ily laced with sil­i­con. When the results were revealed to the National Acad­emy Of Sci­ence in Sep­tem­ber 2009, they effec­tively blew the FBI’s the­ory out of the water.

The Liv­er­more sci­en­tists had tried 56 times to repli­cate the high sil­i­con con­tent with­out any suc­cess. Even though they added increas­ingly high amounts of sil­i­con to the media, they never even came close to the 1.4% in the attack anthrax. Most results were an order of mag­ni­tude lower, with some as low as .001%.

What these tests inad­ver­tently demon­strated is that the anthrax spores could not have been acci­dently con­t­a­m­i­nated by the nutri­ents in the media. “If there is that much sil­i­con, it had to have been added,” Jef­frey Adamovicz, who super­vised Ivins’s work at Fort Det­rick, wrote to me last month. He added that the sil­i­con in the attack anthrax could have been added via a large fermentor—which Bat­telle and other labs use” but “we did not use a fer­men­tor to grow anthrax at USAMRIID . . . [and] We did not have the capa­bil­ity to add sil­i­con com­pounds to anthrax spores.”

***

If Ivins had nei­ther the equip­ment or skills to weaponize anthrax with sil­i­con, then some other party with access to the anthrax must have done it. Even before these star­tling results, Sen. Leahy had told Direc­tor Mueller, “I do not believe in any way, shape, or man­ner that [Ivins] is the only per­son involved in this attack on Congress.”

When I asked a FBI spokesman this month about the Liv­er­more find­ings, he said the FBI was not com­ment­ing on any specifics of the case, other than those dis­cussed in the 2008 brief­ing (which was about a year before Liv­er­more dis­closed its results). He stated: “The Jus­tice Depart­ment and the FBI con­tinue work­ing to con­clude the inves­ti­ga­tion into the 2001 anthrax attacks. We antic­i­pate clos­ing the case in the near future.”

So, even though the pub­lic may be under the impres­sion that the anthrax case had been closed in 2008, the FBI inves­ti­ga­tion is still open—and, unless it can refute the Liv­er­more find­ings on the sil­i­con, it is back to square one.

Discussion

One comment for “The Anthrax Attacks Were NOT the Work of a “Lone Nut””

  1. Among the let­ters sent in the 2001 Anthrax Attacks was a let­ter sent to CHILE and mailed from FLORIDA but post­marked ZURICH, SWITZERLAND.

    This let­ter con­tain­ing anthrax was mailed to Dr. Anto­nio Banfi, a pedi­a­tri­cian in San­ti­ago, Chile. Although the return address was Orlando, Florida, the post­mark was Zurich, Switzer­land. The let­ter was sent via DHL, which used a Swiss bulk mail ship­per in New York and a Swiss post­mark. Unlike the anthrax let­ters with U.S. addressees, the let­ter to Chile was mailed in a busi­ness enve­lope and had a type-written return address, a busi­ness in Florida. Dr. Banfi received the let­ter, but found it sus­pi­cious and gave it to the Chilean author­i­ties. No one is known to have been infected with anthrax from it. The let­ter baf­fled Amer­i­can and Chilean offi­cials because, they say, “as they dig deeper, noth­ing quite adds up.”

    New York Times, Novem­ber 29, 2001, “A NATION CHALLENGED: OVERSEAS PUZZLE; U.S. Con­firms Anthrax in Chilean Letter”

    Posted by WRKG | February 20, 2010, 7:28 pm

Post a comment

FTR BACK STORY

Even MORE Fun With Science: Earthquake Weaponry FTR #69: Tesla technology used by U.S. and U.S.S.R. to alter the weather and cause earthquakes. Read more »