U.S. May Have Been Trying to Pin Anthrax Kllings on Ivins

by francine Hardaway on August 4, 2008

In our current government, with its rich ties to the Saudis, nothing is as it seems. I’m naive, and although I watch the news all day I do so with Continuous Partial Attention, so when I heard that Bruce Ivins, who was about to be indicted for the anthrax letters that were sent out right after 9/11, had committed suicide, I jumped to the conclusion that he was guilty. Only because I had dinner last night with an old friend who is a nationally known civil liberties and prisoners’ rights attorney have I reconsidered.

As it turns out, Coninuous Partial Attention is not enough. It leads to the kind of polling changes that happened as a result of the McCain campaign’s Britney Spears ad (nope, no link bait) and to the pressure on Barack Obama to change his position on offshore drilling. In some ways, we don’t deserve to be a representative government ( reminder: we are not really a democracy). We aren’t educated well enough to vote intelligently.

Here’s what may be as true about Ivins as what is circulating.

There is reason to believe that the Saudis, who supply us much of our oil, are not really our allies. Or that all of them are not our allies.Originally, you remember, Saudis were tied to those letters. But to avoid oil issues and diplomatic issues, the government wants to make sure that, if the Saudis WERE responsible for the anthrax letters, they aren’t proven to be. So the governmentt has to find an American responsible. Preferably a lone Amerian with no ties to any terrorist conspiracy traceable to the Saudis.

The problem with this: very few Americans have access to anthrax. In 2003, another government scientist, Steven J. Hatfill, was identified by then U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft as the lone suspect in the FBI probe — even though there was no evidence he had ever possessed anthrax. Hatfill turned around and sued the government, winning a nearly $6 million settlement earlier this year. Which doesn’t make him innocent.

But it did screw up the government’s plan. Next the FBI turned to Ivins. Apparently, the FBI put Mr. Ivins’ home under surveillance for a year; twice,
officials raided his home. Agents interviewed Mr. Ivins’ current and
former colleagues, his professional acquaintances and his family. Many
were asked to sign confidentiality agreements.

The FBI had Mr.
Ivins in a pressure-cooker. Not everybody thrives in that environment. Diagnosed with
depression, he told a therapist he was considering suicide. Mr. Ivins
was stripped of high-security access at his government job and given a
police escort to a hospital for residential treatment. He was forced to

No wonder he committed suicide. But that doesn’t prove him guilty, and I suspect the government will turn its eyes to someone else fairly soon.

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

Dave August 4, 2008 at 11:15 am

Why should the government turn its eyes to someone else? They can safely blame Ivins, say ‘Case Closed’ and be done.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: