Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
How Bruce Ivins Toppled Saddam
Glenn Greenwald reacts to the suicide of the anthrax letter suspect (blogged by Matt Welch) with a flashback to the hysteria that greeted the attacks in 2001.
During the last week of October, 2001, ABC News, led by Brian Ross, continuously trumpeted the claim as their top news story that government tests conducted on the anthrax -- tests conducted at Ft. Detrick -- revealed that the anthrax sent to Daschele contained the chemical additive known as bentonite. ABC News, including Peter Jennings, repeatedly claimed that the presence of bentonite in the anthrax was compelling evidence that Iraq was responsible for the attacks, since -- as ABC variously claimed -- bentonite "is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program" and "only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons."
ABC News' claim -- which they said came at first from "three well-placed but separate sources," followed by "four well-placed and separate sources" -- was completely false from the beginning. There never was any bentonite detected in the anthrax (a fact ABC News acknowledged for the first time in 2007 only as a result of my badgering them about this issue). It's critical to note that it isn't the case that preliminary tests really did detect bentonite and then subsequent tests found there was none. No tests ever found or even suggested the presence bentonite. The claim was just concocted from the start. It just never happened.
That means that ABC News' "four well-placed and separate sources" fed them information that was completely false -- false information that created a very significant link in the public mind between the anthrax attacks and Saddam Hussein.
If you could dial the Wayback Machine to late 2001, you could find a lot of these linkages that never panned out.
Nigel Watt|8.1.08 @ 11:05AM|#
Uh, bentonite is a clay with a wide variety of uses. If its use is a hallmark of Saddam Hussein, then I'm totally a Ba'ath secret agent.
Nigel Watt|8.1.08 @ 11:08AM|#
More:
Much of bentonite's usefulness in the drilling and geotechnical engineering industry comes from its unique rheological properties. Relatively small quantities of bentonite suspended in water form a viscous, shear thinning material. Most often, bentonite suspensions are also thixotropic, although rare cases of rheopectic behavior have also been reported. At high enough concentrations (~60 grams of bentonite per litre of suspension), bentonite suspensions begin to take on the characteristics of a gel (a fluid with a minimum yield strength required to make it move). For these reasons it is a common component of drilling mud used to curtail drilling fluid invasion by its propensity for aiding in the formation of mud cake.
Bentonite can be used in cement, adhesives, ceramic bodies, and cat litter. Bentonite is also used as a binding agent in the manufacture of taconite pellets as used in the steelmaking industry. Fuller's earth, an ancient dry cleaning substance, is finely ground bentonite, typically used for purifying transformer oil. Bentonite, in small percentages, is used as an ingredient in commercially designed clay bodies and ceramic glazes. Bentonite clay is also used in pyrotechnics to make end plugs and rocket nozzles, and can also be used as a therapeutic face pack for the treatment of acne/oily skin. Clearasil, an acne cream, uses bentonite as an agent to absorb excess sebum, clearing pores.
Rimfax|8.1.08 @ 11:16AM|#
So, Ivins was both Robert Morris (both of them at once) and Ozymandias? Unless, of course, he was Vince Foster instead.
Episiarch|8.1.08 @ 11:22AM|#
Ivins was both Robert Morris (both of them at once) and
Ozymandias?
He has a frown, wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command?
ed|8.1.08 @ 11:23AM|#
Clearasil, an acne cream, uses bentonite
I understand Uday and Qusay had zits. And they didn't take the
teasing well at all.
|8.1.08 @ 11:30AM|#
It would be kind of funny if ABCNews's "source" was none other than the perp. But it's quite possible that never had a source, that they just made it up. A lot of news is fabricated.
Rimfax|8.1.08 @ 11:32AM|#
My nonsense decoded:
- Either he was both the perpetrator of the crime and the primary
accusor (the older Robert Morris accused Cliff Stoll of executing
the first famous Internet Worm, when in fact it was done by the
younger Robert Morris)
- Or he orchestrated it all as a manipulation of public opinion
(Ozymandias in The Watchmen orchestrated a [spoiler
redacted])
- Or his death could be interpreted as a cover up (Vince Foster,
nuf said)
- Or he was quite probably falsely accused, but realized that he
was totally fucked and offed himself (Budd Dwyer was convicted and
sentenced to jail when he decided to kill himself)
|8.1.08 @ 11:37AM|#
If the sources lied to ABC (and actually exist), ABC should have no problem naming them now.
|8.1.08 @ 11:47AM|#
And Greenwald is correct in his assessment that this should be a
huge media scandle.
ABC (and whoever planted the story) really needs to answer for
this.
alan|8.1.08 @ 11:49AM|#
If you could dial the Wayback Machine to late 2001, you
could find a lot of these linkages that never panned
out.
What do you mean by 'if you could'? You do mean this (
www.archive.org ) Way Back Machine, right?
|8.1.08 @ 11:59AM|#
This story is false , the government is lying as usual. If Ivins did it 7 years ago he did not act alone.
Nigel Watt|8.1.08 @ 12:01PM|#
This story is false , the government is lying as usual. If Ivins did it 7 years ago he did not act alone.
That's your 11:00 hour non sequitur, folks.
(Central time.)
Watchmaker|8.1.08 @ 12:02PM|#
Let's set the record straight here. The issue of additives in
the spores sent is still a HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL one. It needs to be
thoroughly debated:
The forensic science evidence behind the anthrax attacks is highly
controversial and needs to be properly debated by scientists
qualified not only in microbiology but also the physics and
chemistry of aerosol powders.
FBI scientist Douglas Beecher published a highly controversial
paper in August 2006 - claiming, without data, that the spores
contained no additives. This is the opposite of what was reported
by US Army labs.
Details are given here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attacks
The August 2006 issue of Applied and Environmental Microbiology
contained an article written by Dr. Douglas Beecher of the FBI labs
in Quantico, VA.[22] The article, titled "Forensic Application of
Microbiological Culture Analysis to Identify Mail Intentionally
Contaminated with Bacillus anthracis spores ," states "Individuals
familiar with the compositions of the powders in the letters have
indicated that they were comprised simply of spores purified to
different extents." The article also specifically criticizes "a
widely circulated misconception" "that the spores were produced
using additives and sophisticated engineering supposedly akin to
military weapon production." The harm done by such things is
described this way: "This idea is usually the basis for implying
that the powders were inordinately dangerous compared to spores
alone. The persistent credence given to this impression fosters
erroneous preconceptions, which may misguide research and
preparedness efforts and generally detract from the magnitude of
hazards posed by simple spore preparations." However, after this
article had appeared the editor of Applied and Environmental
Microbiology, L. Nicholas Ornston, stated that he was uncomfortable
with Beecher's statement in the article since it had no evidence to
back it up and contained no citation.[23]
In August 2007 Dr. Kay Mereish, UN Chief, Biological Planning and
Operations, published a letter in Applied and Environmental
Microbiology titled "Unsupported Conclusions on the Bacillus
anthracis Spores".[25] This letter, published in the same journal
as FBI scientist Douglas Beecher (see paragraph above), points out
that the statements made by Dr. Beecher in his article on the lack
of additives were not backed up with any data. She suggested that
Dr. Beecher publish a paper with analytical data showing the
absence of silica or other additives. Such data would include SEM
images of the pure spores as well as EDX spectra and EDX images
showing the absence of any foreign additives such as silica or the
elements silicon and oxygen. Dr. Mereish referenced a 2006 CBRN,
Counter-Proliferation and Response meeting in Paris where a
presenter announced that an additive was present in the attack
anthrax that affected the spore's electrical charges.
Alan Vanneman|8.1.08 @ 12:19PM|#
From the current NYT story on Ivins' death:
"A federal law enforcement official said that Mr. Ivins was
regarded as a legitimate suspect in the case and that agents were
nearing a possible arrest."
In other words, they weren't planning to arrest him, they were
nearing a time when they might possibly arrest him (maybe),
particularly now that he's dead so that he can't sue them. Your
Justice Department at work.
By the way, the Times' lead is "With investigators close to filing
charges in connection with the string of anthrax deaths in 2001, a
senior biodefense researcher took his own life earlier this week, a
lawyer for the scientist said on Friday."
Obviously, Ivins' lawyer was not the source for the opening
statement "With investigators close to filing charges ...". The
Times provides no source for that statement, and does not repeat it
in the body of the article. Your New York Times at work.
Alan Vanneman|8.1.08 @ 12:24PM|#
Update: The Wash Post article posted today is much more specific, saying that Ivins' lawyer is an expert in death penalty cases who was appointed as Ivins' lawyer. It sounds like the Times wasn't able to talk to anyone.
stuartl|8.1.08 @ 12:25PM|#
A lot of news is fabricated.
More likely it was rumor running amuck during a time of hysteria.
Never assume conspiracy when incompetence is sufficient. See
Hurricane Katrina reporting for another good example.
ed|8.1.08 @ 12:31PM|#
Oh my god, my cat's a terrorist!
Everybody's cat is a terrorist. That's their
job.
|8.1.08 @ 12:33PM|#
We need to know a lot more about who Bruce Ivins was, particularly his political sympathies and passions.
|8.1.08 @ 1:11PM|#
Something VERY FISHY here......Why would this guy WANT to KILL
the National Enquirer Photo Editor?? Was He Whaco?? or Maybe HYPER
ZIOCON?? Inquiring MINDS wanna Know!!!!!!!!!!! What would HE have
against ANY of the FIVE targets??? +++Let's look the targets and
their timing.
Sept. 18, 2001: Trenton Mailing of anthrax letters to NBC and NY
Post and probably to the National Enquirer.
Oct. 9, 2001: Trenton Mailing of anthrax letters to Daschle and
Leahy. I'm NOT buying THIS "OFFICIAL" Story!! Suicide?? Oh Yeah..So
convenient, no need to explain the strange CHOICE of the FIVE
TARGETS......What WOULD, DID Ivins (is that a Jewish name?? Jus
WONDERIN) HAVE against SENATORS Leahy & Daschle?? You Think
this might OPEN up A BIGGER (better more believable)
STORY???????
Other Matt|8.1.08 @ 1:14PM|#
As for the guy's politics, you might be able to divine something
from his
letters to the editor for our local-ish paper here.
I can't really, seems pretty centrist on initial scan, but someone
else might.
|8.1.08 @ 1:25PM|#
Nothing like the appearance of dead bodyz to get the juces flowing. Any story can get a lift from a corpse or two. Sad that the press is so horizontal on anything bush connected. Front page Headline in NY Times "Move on, nothing to see here"..I guess that court decision on Rove has got them a bit unnerved, WTF!!
TallDave|8.1.08 @ 1:28PM|#
Surprise, the media screwed up again.
This story is fairly irrelevant. The bentonite claim was never
taken seriously by the White House, which pretty well dismissed it
out of hand.
As far as is known, only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite
to produce biological weapons, but officials caution that the
presence of the chemical alone does not constitute firm evidence of
Iraqi involvement.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer had denied that bentonite was
found on the letters, but another senior White House official
backed off Fleischer's comments, saying "at this point" there does
not appear to be bentonite.
Fleischer added that no test or analysis has concluded that
bentonite is present in the Daschle anthrax, and "no other finding
contradicts or calls into question" that conclusion.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92270&page=1
In any case, as was pointed out at the time, any lab could have
done it with bentonite.
Experts say the bentonite discovery doesn't rule out a very
well-equipped lab using the Iraqi technique. In fact, commercial
spray dryers that Iraq used to produce its biological weapons were
bought on the open market from the Danish subsidiary of a U.S.
company for about $100,000 a piece.
So, no, this has nothing to do with the invasion. And I'm sure
Greenwald won't be discussing the numerous financial links between
AQ and Saddam, which the media now assiduously ignore while
mindlessly repeating the "no operational links" mantra.
Dan|8.1.08 @ 1:28PM|#
Why would he want to kill?
Justification for war.
Justification for the expansion of the Bioweapons industry. Look at
the Expansion of Detrick since the attacks. Funny enough in the
Environmental Impact Statements for the expansion they state
several times that things like the letter attacks won't happen
because they screen their scientists. (I am a local, I read
them)
Dan|8.1.08 @ 1:32PM|#
also after what happened to Olsen back in the good old days who says this guy did not have help taking the pills.
Nigel Watt|8.1.08 @ 1:35PM|#
Something VERY FISHY here......Why would this guy WANT to KILL the National Enquirer Photo Editor?? Was He Whaco?? or Maybe HYPER ZIOCON?? Inquiring MINDS wanna Know!!!!!!!!!!! What would HE have against ANY of the FIVE targets??? +++Let's look the targets and their timing.
...
Other Matt|8.1.08 @ 1:52PM|#
Funny enough in the Environmental Impact Statements for the
expansion they state several times that things like the letter
attacks won't happen because they screen their
scientists.
Why would they address murder in their EIS? That's like saying "We
will hire an urban planner, but in hiring that urban planner we
won't reduce the average intelligence of the area and end up with a
racist assbite because we screen them." Ok, this is admirable, and
should be applauded, but what does it have to do with an EIS?
|8.1.08 @ 1:56PM|#
I've got a small jar of bentonite right here. I didn't get it from Saddam and Iraq, I got it from the homebrew supply store down the street. It's a common clarifying agent, removing suspended proteins from beer and wine. http://www.benshomebrew.com/wine-making/wine-additives/bentonite.html
|8.1.08 @ 2:11PM|#
I remember when Other Matt used to include arguments relating to
something I wrote in his personal attacks on me.
But it didn't take too long to break him of that habit. Now he just
yells "poopyhead" and runs away.
First Little Pig|8.1.08 @ 3:02PM|#
I suspect foul play (murder most foul). Ivans was probably in on
the whole anthrax attack with a number of others and at the behest
of some group who really wanted war against Iraq. Either he let
slip that he was going to spill the beans and his former masters
killed him, or he got fingered to FBI to take the fall (and then
was killed by his former masters) OR the FBI was getting too close
and when indicted was killed by his former masters.
All to make him look guilty and take the spotlight off the real
culprits. Our own Lee Harvey Oswald.
|8.1.08 @ 3:07PM|#
Ivans was probably in on the whole anthrax attack with a
number of others and at the behest of some group who really wanted
war against Iraq.
Jeebus on jet-ski.
The anthrax letters were mailed within a few days of 9/11, as near
as I can tell. The Chimpluminati were not exactly short on support
for war that week, you might recall.
Fluffy|8.1.08 @ 3:16PM|#
TallDave misses the point as usual.
If there was no bentonite in the anthrax, and if ABC told the truth
about having sources, then four government sources deliberately
lied to ABC, and used those lies to try to direct public outrage
about these attacks against Saddam.
You may be quite right that even if bentonite was there it wouldn't
have proven anything. You may be quite right that the White House
wasn't really interested in the bentonite claims. But that's really
irrelevant to the story at hand.
The story at hand is that there were four highly-placed government
sources who decided to lie to ABC about these attacks. I think it's
worthwhile to be interested in who they were and why they lied. I
realize that you don't really care, of course.
If anything, if it were true that the White House didn't care about
the bentonite claims and that the bentonite wouldn't connect the
attacks to Iraq anyway, then it just makes the story that was fed
to ABC that much more of a lie.
First Little Pig|8.1.08 @ 3:20PM|#
R C Dean,
Preparation for the Anthrax attack most likely pre-dated the 9/11
attacks. So either it was a separate unrelated attack (just
mysteriously well-timed) or it was being conducted somehow in
conjunction with the attack.
Maybe there was a standing order to send them out whenever the next
terror attack happened - they just didn't know if it would be a car
bombing, subway gassing, or planes flying into buildings. If a car
bombing it would be insufficient to drive the public wild. A
bombing AND a poison letter attack is much more effective.
Maybe the same people who orchestrated the 9/11 attack orchestrated
the anthrax since they did not know that the buildings would
fall.
Or maybe not.
Who do you think carried out the anthrax attack? You and your
Samizdata folks still railing against global jihad and see a mullah
under every bed?
stuartl|8.1.08 @ 3:49PM|#
For libertarians, you guys have a remarkably high opinion of
government competence.
It is late Friday afternoon, so drink!.
Episiarch|8.1.08 @ 4:10PM|#
You and your Samizdata folks still railing against global
jihad and see a mullah under every bed?
Oh no you didn't!
Seriously, folks, let's not give the government more credit than it
is due. The most conspiracy I can accept is Fluffy's version; any
more and you're getting Truthery. And even Fluffy's is a bit
far-fetched.
Other Matt|8.1.08 @ 4:19PM|#
I remember when Other Matt used to include arguments
relating to something I wrote in his personal attacks on
me.
Where are you referring to, joe? On this thread the only comment I
made was about the appropriate or inappropriate nature of including
"potential murder" on an EIS. Had nothing to do with you, unless
you were posting under a ghost name.
|8.1.08 @ 5:21PM|#
I always thought the key to the case was the photo editor. Somebody had it out for him and sent the other letters to muck up the trail.
|8.1.08 @ 5:36PM|#
I always liked the idea that some jihadi was told to attack "the American media," so he looked in the Florida phone book and found "American Media, Inc." (publishers of the National Inquirer) and mailed them the anthrax.
|8.1.08 @ 8:13PM|#
""""More likely it was rumor running amuck during a time of
hysteria. Never assume conspiracy when incompetence is
sufficient."""
"""White House spokesman Ari Fleischer had denied that bentonite
was found on the letters, but another senior White House official
backed off Fleischer's comments, saying "at this point" there does
not appear to be bentonite."""
Not like anyone in the Whitehouse has leaked false information to
the press before. Ari propagated lies to our face. Even the
President lied to our face about Rumsfeld's departure. Why should
anyone believe them?
Dave W.|8.1.08 @ 8:56PM|#
the Anthrax Attacks of 2001 were a conspiracy which is now being covered up. they probably go all the way up to Cheney. Yuk, yuk.
|8.1.08 @ 9:09PM|#
Probably not covering up a conspiracy, but it would be reasonable to consider that the ABC sources were connected to the Whitehouse. They have proven themselves able and willing to pass out incorrect information to media sources.
Ross |8.1.08 @ 9:20PM|#
Never assume conspiracy when incompetence is
sufficient.
The appearance of "incompetence" could provide cover for
conspiracy.
stuartl|8.1.08 @ 10:42PM|#
It could. But then you would be arguing that this Whitehouse was highly competent and very capable of thinking through the consequences of it's actions.
Jeff|8.2.08 @ 7:28AM|#
The news coverage of the suicide death of Bruce Ivins, a suspect
in the notorious Anthrax case is notably dispassionate. It serves
as a stark contrast with the frenzied reports by sections of the
media dubbing the biological agent to be the work of some sinister
men spread from the Iraqi deserts to the Afghan mountain caves and
Aral sea shore in between. Would the BBC now ask Tom Mangold to
trace back his footsteps to the origin of this mischief? Here's a
link for anybody wishing to revisit the imaginative episode of
BBC's Panorama on this topic:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/audio_video/programmes/panorama/transcripts/
transcript_28_10_01.txt
|8.4.08 @ 3:48PM|#
""" But then you would be arguing that this Whitehouse was
highly competent and very capable of thinking through the
consequences of it's actions.""""
Who says it has to be highly competent? They are competent. I have
many bad names for those currently in the Whitehouse, but they've
known exactly what they are doing.
I guess if you want to use the conspiracy, you could say they
conspired to strengthen the executive branch, conspired to put
conservative judges on the SCOTUS, and conspired to get rid of
Saddam.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245