“In my view, he has broken the Ninth Commandment:

"Thou shall not bear false witness’!”

Nicholas Stix, Uncensored

Monday, October 08, 2007

FBI Terrorizes Hatfill

The Anthrax/Hatfill Files

By Nicholas Stix

August 26, 2002

Toogood Reports

Is the Federal Bureau of Investigation suffering the institutional equivalent of a nervous breakdown? That is the just one of the questions raised by Steven J. Hatfill’s second dramatic press conference, on Sunday, in which Hatfill continued to take the offensive, publicizing the facts of the case as he knows them, providing evidence that he believes should exculpate him, daring the FBI to be as open as he has been, and indicting his tormentors by name.

Hatfill accused the Bureau, the media (particularly the New York Times and its columnist, Nicholas Kristof) and Dr. Barbara Hatch Rosenberg of using his status as a “person of interest” as a pretext for terrorizing him, his girlfriend, and his friends. But his most stinging criticism, by far, was of attorney General John Ashcroft, a man who considers himself a devout Christian, but whom Hatfill accused of being something less than that. Fighting back tears, Hatfill threw down the gauntlet at Ashcroft’s feet, saying of the attorney general, “In my view, he has broken the Ninth Commandment:

"Thou shall not bear false witness’!”

Hatfill indicted the Justice Department, the FBI, and specifically, Ashcroft, of being behind the perpetual motion machine whereby a Justice Department leak would lead to a media feeding frenzy, which would in turn be used by the FBI to justify renewed activity against Hatfill.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentleman. Two weeks ago, I reluctantly appeared before the TV cameras to defend myself against the bizarre allegations that were appearing about me in the news media dealing with last year’s anthrax attacks. These allegations were [inaudible] by ongoing leaks from the Justice Department, and those leaks continue to this day. Several days ago, the Justice Department representatives confirmed to the Associated Press, that there was no evidence linking me to the anthrax attacks. Despite this lack of evidence, I am still hounded by the FBI, victimized in a never-ending torrent of leaks and general innuendoes from the United States Attorney General John Ashcroft and unnamed others, all of which has been amplified and embellished by the media. This fascination with my character appears to be part of a government-run effort to show the American people that it is proceeding vigorously and successfully with the anthrax investigation....

I want to look my fellow Americans directly in the eye, and declare to them, I am not the anthrax killer! I know nothing about the anthrax attacks. I had absolutely nothing to do with this terrible crime. My life is being destroyed by arrogant government bureaucrats, who have [inaudible] groundless innuendo and half information about me to gullible reporters who in turn repeat them, in the guise of news. I want to give you, the American people, an idea of what it is like to be named a ‘person of interest’ by the attorney general of the United States.

John Ashcroft has now publicly told the American people that I am a “person of interest” in last year’s anthrax attacks, just recently, several days ago, at a news conference in Newark, New Jersey. The FBI says that I am not a suspect, and that it does not use the term, “person of interest.” Mr. Ashcroft, however, continues to do this publicly, and I am here to complain about this, and its consequences.

My attorneys have filed an ethics complaint on Mr. Ashcroft’s conduct, as well that of as others involved in this matter, and I will be very interested to learn how well the Justice Department will police itself.

Mr. Ashcroft has repeatedly testified to his strong Christian values, and I highly respect him for this. Unlike many others, I was delighted when he was selected for his appointment to this high public office. In practice, however, by openly, repeatedly naming me as a “person of interest,” Mr. Ashcroft has not only violated Justice Department regulations and guidelines which bind him as the nation’s top law enforcement official, but in my view, he has broken the Ninth Commandment: “Thou shall not bear false witness”!

I have never met Mr. Ashcroft. I don’t know him, I’ve never spoken with him, and I do not understand his personalized focus on me. My lawyers can find no legal definition for a “person of interest.” I, however, have a working definition: A “person of interest” is someone who comes into being, when the government is under intense political pressure to solve a crime, but can’t do so.

Is it because the crime is too difficult to solve, or because the authorities are proceeding in what could mildly be called, a wrongheaded manner?...

It then becomes necessary for the FBI and other authorities to produce a [inaudible] body. Because there’s no suspect, and the authorities have nothing on which to base a prosecution, they pick a serviceable target. This should preferentially be a person about whom mysterious questions can be raised, someone with an interesting or colorful background. Then they give him a prejudicial label: “Person of interest.”...

What is useful, is that the FBI can be seen to be on the job. The press is hot on the trail, and the public is satisfied as Mr. Ashcroft continues to say, without any explanation, that progress in the anthrax letter attacks is being made.

God help us all, if the FBI’s pursuit of Mr. Ashcroft’s person of interest, me, represents that progress....

Almost a quarter century ago, I lived in a city that had a suburb named “Greendale.” The FBI and some in the media linked this with a non-existent Greendale School that appeared in the return address on four [sic] anthrax letters. ABC News even reported, as a fact, that I lived next door to that non-existent school for four years, citing unidentified government gumshoes.

My entire life history has been laid out on the Internet by reporters and conspiracy nuts....

It is one thing to have your alleged faults and misdeeds publicly aired, because you are seeking, as a candidate, for higher office. But I am a private citizen, and one who has not sought the limelight.

Remember your own travails, Mr. Ashcroft, when elements of your past were dug up by persons opposed to your selection as attorney general? I could dwell on this at length, but my principles bar me from doing so here.

In any event, Mr. Ashcroft, you asked for that; I did not. And I wonder how you would have coped, being on the end of the media frenzy that I have been enduring this entire summer.

Hatfill charged the FBI with following him 24 hours a day, tailing his car at a distance of as little as two feet, tearing up his apartment and that of his girlfriend during searches, illegally searching his girlfriend’s purse, and of trying to get his friends to lure him into privately confessing to having committed the anthrax letter attacks last fall which killed five people and sickened over one dozen others. Hatfill specifically named FBI special agents Jennifer Grant and Pamela Lay for the mistreatment of his girlfriend, and showed photographs that he and the girlfriend and taken of her trashed apartment.

Hatfill and his civil attorney, Victor Glasberg, also charged the Bureau with illegally leaking information to the media. Hatfill charged New York Times reporter Nicholas Kristof with fabricating the claims that Hatfill had spent time in a “cabin” that functioned as a CIA safehouse, and that he had taken and failed three polygraph examinations in which he was asked about the anthrax attacks. Hatfill said “I have not taken, let alone failed, three polygraphs on anthrax since January. I had one polygraph session which the FBI did administer to me in January, and I was told I passed, and the examiner was satisfied that I had told the truth. Mr. Kristof never called me about this allegation, nor did he call my attorney.”

Hatfill offered to help the FBI with writing and blood samples the Bureau had never requested of him. He reported that on the days that the anthrax letters were mailed, he had been working 11-14 hour days in a team for SAIC, and offered the FBI work records, which he showed the audience. Observing that Iraq was in the possession of anthrax, and that several of the 911 terrorists were in the South Florida vicinity of American Media, Inc., the recipient of the first anthrax deadly anthrax letter, which killed photography editor Bob Stevens, Hatfill mocked the FBI’s dogged insistence on following only the “homegrown terrorist” theory.

On a personal note, I measure the effectiveness of the smear campaign against Hatfill, based on a conversation I had with an editor of another publication in mid-July. Although the editor was more familiar with Hatfill than I was, had always thought highly of him, and is one of the best-informed people in America, even he was beginning to have his doubts about the man.

Meanwhile, information released by the National Whistleblower Center and the Justice Department concluded that Van Harp, the director of the FBI’s Washington, D.C. field office, and the agent in charge of the anthrax investigation, was guilty of misconduct, in botching an internal investigation into the Bureau’s handling of the 1992 incident at Ruby Ridge.

In 1992, Rudy Ridge, Idaho, was the site of two of the darkest days in Bureau history. On August 21, U.S. Marshal William Degan and Sammy Weaver, the 14-year-old son of white separatist Randy Weaver, died in a gunfight. The following day, an FBI sharpshooter shot and killed Randy Weaver’s wife, 42-year-old Vicki Weaver, while she was holding the Weavers’ baby. The sharpshooter had been ordered to shoot to kill. The shoot-to-kill order, issued by FBI officials Richard Rogers and Larry Potts, violated FBI rules of engagement, and was later ruled illegal by a federal judge.Rather than being prosecuted, dismissed, or suspended, most of the FBI supervisors responsible for Ruby Ridge were promoted.

A secret, 1999 report by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, cited Harp for having “committed misconduct” by “helping to prepare an incomplete report on the 1992 Ruby Ridge siege that had the effect of protecting high-level FBI officials,” according to reporter Dan Eggen, writing in the August 24 Washington Post. Eggen reported that, “The report by Justice Department attorney Richard M. Rogers recommended a letter of censure or suspension for Harp, but Stephen R. Colgate, then the assistant attorney general, rejected that recommendation in January 2001, sources said.” Colgate protected all higher-level FBI officials who were responsible for the Ruby Ridge fiasco from being brought to justice.

Eggen noted that groups such as the National Whistleblower Center have complained -- as have FBI agents -- that the FBI has a corrupt organizational culture, in which bad agents and officials rise to the top, through covering up each other’s mistakes, while blaming underlings.

Dan Eggen reported that, “In a written statement, Harp said that leaks about his role in the Ruby Ridge inquiries violate ‘all sense of propriety’ and ignore reviews that exonerated him.”

At Steven Hatfill’s Sunday news conference, Harp was hoist on his own petard. Hatfill’s civil attorney, Victor Glasberg, observed that “Mr. Harp was soundly criticized in a report for ... by the Justice Dept’s Office of Professional Responsibility, claiming that he had engaged in substantial misconduct, relative to the Ruby Ridge matter. Well, it turned out that this report ended up getting leaked, and here’s Mr. Harp. In a written statement, Harp said that leaks about his role in the Ruby Ridge inquiries violate all sense of propriety. Well, I don’t know if that’s true. It may, but I’ll tell you this: The investigation that Mr. Harp is conducting of Steve Hatfill has as many leaks as the Titanic going down. So, he should take his own instructions....”

Glasberg announced that he was making a formal complaint on behalf of Hatfill about John Ashcroft, to the Justice Department and other agencies concerned with corruption of government power. The complaint has three particulars: The utilization of the terminology “person of interest,” which “has no sanction in law”; the violation of Hatfill’s privacy; and FBI/Justice Department leaks to the media.

Former FBI deputy director, Skip Brandon, appeared on Wolf Blitzer’s show on CNN before and after the Hatfill conference. Brandon attempted to defend the Bureau, but inadvertently underscored Hatfill and Glasberg’s criticisms:

“It does not sound credible. That is not how the FBI I know acts. I hope it’s not, at any event.

“It doesn’t make any sense for the FBI or the Justice Department to have leaked ...

“We’re hearing only one side of this.

“He says he wants his privacy, but he keeps calling press conferences, trying to stretch his 15 minutes of fame.”

So, now Hatfill is not only a serial murderer, but his defense of himself proves his guilt, as well as that he is a publicity hound!

It appears that the FBI is undergoing some sort of institutional psychosis, due to the pressure it is under to catch someone by the anniversary of 911. Officials are cracking up, as they try to make Hatfill crack up. The hope is apparently that terrorizing Hatfill will drive him to do something that will retroactively justify the Bureau’s terror tactics. We are in the land of self-fulfilling prophecies.

Appearing on the same show with Skip Brandon was Patrick Lang, a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst. Lang remarked that the FBI’s “domestic terrorist story ... doesn’t make any sense.” Regarding the anthrax letters, which were written in the style of Islamic terrorists, but which the FBI insists were written by homegrown terrorists to seem like Islamists, Lang observed wryly, “Sometimes a cigar really is a cigar.” As for the FBI’s behavior in persecuting Hatfill, Lang noted, “I never served in the FBI, but it is characteristic of large bureaucracies to behave in ways they’re not used to behaving, when they’re under pressure.”

Unfortunately, in the age of Leviathan’s war against terrorism, the FBI is under constant pressure. And its officials have increasingly responded to that pressure, by adopting the habit of behaving like either madmen or outlaws.

posted by Nicholas at 7:16 PM

Reporters and Federal Subpoenas

Hatfill v. Ashcroft and Hatfill v. The New York Times

Status: In Hatfill's case against the government in D.C. federal court, several of the reporters and media organizations have testified; however, they refused to disclose any confidential information. In April 2007, Judge Walton urged Hatfill to force reporters to reveal their sources or risk losing his case. Hatfill then filed motions to compel the reporters' testimony and subpoenaed several news organizations.

A second defamation lawsuit filed by Hatfill against The New York Times in federal court in Virginia was dismissed in January 2007. Hatfill is appealing that dismissal for the second time.

News media organizations and individuals involved:

ABC

CBS

NBC

The Associated Press

Gannett

Newsweek

The Washington Post

The New York Times

Scott Shane (formerly with The Baltimore Sun)

The Los Angeles Times

Dr. Steven J. Hatfill sued Attorney General John Ashcroft and other government officials under the Privacy Act in federal court in Washington, D.C., over government leaks and being publicly named a "person of interest" in the investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks that killed five people and sickened 17. Although he has not been charged, Hatfill lost his job as a government contractor and has been unable to find employment since being identified in the investigation.

Because the Department of Justice (DOJ) claimed that submitting to Hatfill's discovery requests would hamper the ongoing anthrax investigation, in Feb. 2004 Judge Reggie B. Walton approved the use of news media subpoenas in the Privacy Act suit, but Hatfill's attorneys declined because of anticipated legal challenges by the media. In October Walton approved their use again, and in December he ordered as many as 100 federal agents to waive any confidentiality agreements they had with the media. Beginning Dec. 15, a number of news organizations received subpoenas to provide documents and testimony in the case.

At least 13 subpoenas were served. Four subpoenas -- served on National Public Radio, The Baltimore Sun, CNN and UPI -- were voluntarily withdrawn early on. Another nine subpoenas -- served on ABC, CBS, NBC, The Associated Press, The Washington Post, Newsweek, Gannett Co., The Los Angeles Times, and former Baltimore Sun reporter Scott Shane -- were contested primarily in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. (the Times subpoena was challenged in federal court in Los Angeles). Another subpoena was served in federal court in New York on Don Foster, a professor at Vassar College who wrote about the FBI's investigation.

In late May 2005, after the government made federal employees available as witnesses, the subpoenas against the news media parties were voluntarily withdrawn.

The subpoenas were then served again. Reporters agreed to testify at depositions, but they refused to answer questions related to the names of sources or other confidential material. No motion to compel that testimony has been filed any party at this point.

The DOJ maintains that without the identity of the reporters’ sources (specifically, the FBI and DOJ agents who were responsible for leaking information about the investigation to the media), Hatfill cannot establish the elements of his case against the government. Furthermore, they say that until Hatfill can establish the elements, any information that they have will remain protected by a law enforcement privilege. Hatfill contends that the names of the sources are not necessary to his case, and that the law enforcement privilege should not apply to the government’s information regardless.

Hatfill also sued The New York Times and reporter Nicholas Kristof in a separate case for libel over their coverage of the investigation. The libel suit was dismissed in November 2004, but Hatfill appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond (4th Cir.). In July 2005, a three-judge panel found in a 2-1 decision that his allegations were sufficient to support a case, and the full appeals court agreed. However, the lawsuit was dismissed for the second time in January when a lower-court federal judge ruled that because Hatfill was a public figure, he would not be able to meet his burden of proof. To be successful in a defamation lawsuit, public persons must prove that the defamatory statements in question were written with "actual malice" - in other words, the author knew that what he was writing was false. The judge said that given the content of Kristof's columns, Hatfill could never meet this burden.

Links:

10/28/04:

Reporter subpoenas approved in anthrax suit

11/30/04: Libel lawsuit over anthrax mailing investigation dismissed

12/06/04: Confidentiality waivers to be issued in anthrax suit

12/17/04: Media subpoenaed in anthrax case

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

“I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke”

Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report

by Alan Miller

http://www.opednews.com

Official Account of 9/11 a “Joke” and a “Cover-up”

September 23, 2007 – Seven CIA veterans have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and have called for a new investigation. “I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 Report is a joke,” said Raymond McGovern, 27-year veteran of the CIA, who chaired National Intelligence Estimates during the seventies. “There are a whole bunch of unanswered questions. And the reason they’re unanswered is because this administration will not answer the questions,” he said. McGovern, who is also the founder of VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity), is one of many signers of a petition to reinvestigate 9/11.[1]

Raymond McGovern
During his 27-year CIA career, McGovern personally delivered intelligence briefings to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials. Upon retirement in 1990, McGovern was awarded the CIA’s Intelligence Commendation Medallion and received a letter of appreciation from then President George H. W. Bush. However, McGovern returned the award[2] in 2006 in protest of the current George W. Bush Administration’s advocacy and use of torture.
In his blurb for 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out,” edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, McGovern wrote[3]: “It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole “war on terror” was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people---indeed the people of the world as a whole---with an issue second to none in importance and urgency. I give this book, which in no way can be dismissed as the ravings of ‘paranoid conspiracy theorists,’ my highest possible recommendation.”
William Christison, a 29-year CIA veteran, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis also describes the 9/11 Commission Report as a “joke” and offers even more outspoken criticism. In a 2006 audio interview[4] he said, "We very seriously need an entirely new very high level and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all.”
Earlier this year, in an endorsement of David Ray Griffin’s book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Christison wrote[5], “[There’s] a strong body of evidence showing the official U.S. Government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies.” And in an online essay[6] in late 2006, he wrote, “I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. … An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. … The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.”
Prior to his retirement from the CIA in 1979, Christison served as Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis, overseeing 200 analysts who collected intelligence and provided analysis on all regions and every country in the world. Prior to that, he served as one of only a handful of NIO’s in the intelligence community. NIO’s are responsible for the intelligence community efforts in a particular area and are the principal advisors to the Director of Central Intelligence. Christison was NIO for Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa.
Melvin Goodman, PhD, is another former senior CIA official who calls the 9/11 Commission Report a “coverup” and who signed the petition to reinvestigate 9/11.[7] Goodman was the Division Chief of the CIA’s Office of Soviet Affairs and served as Senior Analyst from 1966 - 1990. He also served as Professor of International Security at the National War College from 1986 - 2004.
In testimony before a 2005 Congressional briefing on the 9/11 Commission Report[8], Goodman said, “I want to talk about the [9/11] Commission itself, about the flawed process of the Commission and finally about the conflict of interest within the Commission that is extremely important to understand the failure of the Commission. … The final report is ultimately a coverup. I don't know how else to describe it." Goodman is currently Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy and Adjunct Professor of Government at Johns Hopkins University.

Robert Baer is another well known CIA veteran who has questioned the official account of 9/11. A 21-year CIA veteran and specialist in the Middle East, Baer was awarded the Career Intelligence Medal upon his retirement in 1997. After retirement, he wrote two best-selling non-fiction books about the CIA, See No Evil and Sleeping with the Devil, the former of which was the basis for the Academy Award-winning movie Syriana, starring George Clooney. Baer was also the writer and on-camera commentator for the Emmy Award-nominated documentary Cult of the Suicide Bomber.
Baer has repeatedly questioned whether al-Qaida could have accomplished 9/11 alone. The 9/11 Commission Report categorically found al-Qaida to be entirely responsible for 9/11, stating, "Similarly, we have seen no evidence that any foreign government -- or government official -- supplied any funding." However, this 9/11 Commission finding directly contradicts the earlier finding of the Joint House-Senate Select Intelligence Committee's 2002 Report[9] (p.415) of "sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers.”
In a 2002 essay[10] for The Guardian, Baer wrote, "Did bin Laden act alone, through his own al-Qaida network, in launching the attacks? About that I'm far more certain and emphatic: no." In subsequent interviews, Baer has suggested that support for the attacks could have come from Saudi Arabia and Iran.
In 2006, during an interview by Thom Hartmann[11], Baer, after commenting on the financial profits being made from 9/11, was asked: “What about political profit? There are those who suggest that ... someone in that chain of command ... had pretty good knowledge that 9/11 was going to happen -- and really didn't do much to stop it -- or even obstructed efforts to stop it because they thought it would lend legitimacy to Bush's ... failing presidency.” Baer replied: “Absolutely.” Hartmann then asked, “So you are personally of the opinion ... that there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government?" To which Baer replied, "There is that possibility, the evidence points at it." When Hartmann continued, "And why is it not being investigated?” Baer replied, "Why isn't the WMD story being investigated? Why hasn't anybody been held accountable for 9/11? We held people accountable after Pearl Harbor. Why has there been no change in command? Why have there been no political repercussions? Why has there been no -- any sort of exposure on this? It really makes you wonder."
In his blurb for the revised and updated edition of David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 9/11 Debunking, Baer wrote[12]: "Until we get a complete, honest, transparent investigation …, we will never know what happened on 9/11.”
"I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war,” wrote well-known intelligence analyst Robert David Steele in 2006 in a review of the book, 9/11 Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley[13]. Steele is the author of numerous books on the intelligence services and is currently the CEO of OSS.net, a proponent of Open Source Intelligence. Steele has 25 years of combined service in the CIA and the U.S. Marine Corps. He also served as the second ranking civilian (GS-14) in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988 - 1992 and was a member of the Adjunct Faculty of Marine Corps University. Steele continued, “I have to tell anyone who cares to read this: I believe it. I believe it enough to want a full investigation that passes the smell test of the 9/11 families as well as objective outside observers.”
In a subsequent interview on the Alex Jones Show[14], Steele said, "The U.S. government did not properly investigate this [9/11] and there are more rocks to be turned over," and added, "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that, as far as I'm concerned, means that this case has not been properly investigated. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition."
In late 2004, a group of 25 intelligence service and law enforcement veterans sent a joint letter to Congress[15] expressing their concerns about “serious shortcomings,” “omissions,” and “major flaws” in the 9/11 Commission Report and offering their services for a new investigation. Their letter was apparently entirely ignored. Among the signers were four CIA veterans; Raymond McGovern and Melvin Goodman (both mentioned above) and Lynne Larkin and David MacMichael. Lynne Larkin was a CIA Operations Officer who served in several CIA foreign stations before being assigned to the CIA's Counter-Intelligence Center. There, she co-chaired a multi-agency task force, which, among other functions, provided direction to other federal agencies for coordinating intelligence efforts among the many intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
David MacMichael, PhD, is a former Senior Estimates Officer at the CIA with special responsibility for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the CIA's National Intelligence Council. Prior to joining the CIA, he served as a U.S. Marine Corps officer for ten years and for four years as a counter-insurgency advisor to the government.
Their letter read:
"[W]e the undersigned wish to bring to the attention of the Congress and the people of the United States what we believe are serious shortcomings in the report and its recommendations. … Omission is one of the major flaws in the Commission’s report. We are aware of significant issues and cases that were duly reported to the commission by those of us with direct knowledge, but somehow escaped attention. … The omission of such serious and applicable issues and information by itself renders the report flawed, and casts doubt on the validity of many of its recommendations. ... The Commission, with its incomplete report of "facts and circumstances", intentional avoidance of assigning accountability, and disregard for the knowledge, expertise and experience of those who actually do the job, has now set about pressuring our Congress and our nation to hastily implement all its recommendations. …We the undersigned, who have worked within various government agencies (FBI, CIA, FAA, DIA, Customs) responsible for national security and public safety, call upon you in Congress to include the voices of those with first-hand knowledge and expertise in the important issues at hand. We stand ready to do our part.”
And they and thousands of dedicated, loyal, and experienced military officers, intelligence service and law enforcement veterans, and government officials still stand ready to provide assistance for a thorough, impartial, and honest investigation into the terrible acts of 9/11.Statements questioning the official account of 9/11 and calls for a new investigation by hundreds of credible individuals can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com

[1] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11. Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633
[2] I Do Not Wish to be Associated with Torture by Ray McGovern March 2, 2006 http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/58/18096
[3] Ray McGovern’s blurb for 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out,” edited by David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott. March, 2007 http://www.interlinkbooks.com/product_info.php?products_id=1545&osCsid=5a22b94fffd724962a118f454c5d7194
[4] William Christison interviewed by George Kenney on Electric Politics. Sept. 29, 2006 http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2006/09/the_case_for_intellectual_inte.html
[5] William Christison’s blurb for David Ray Griffin’s book, Debunking 9/11 Debunking March 2007 http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/product-description/156656686X
[6] Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11 by William Christison Aug. 16, 2006 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Christison14.htm
[7] Petition to Reinvestigate 9/11. Oct. 26, 2004 http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041026093059633
[8] The 911 Commission Report – One Year Later, a Congressional Briefing July 22, 2005 http://www.vt911.org/McKinneyReport20050722transcript.pdf
[9] Congressional Reports: Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities before and after the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 December, 2002 http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html
[10] See No Evil (part 2) by Robert Baer in The Guardian January 12, 2002 http://books.guardian.co.uk/extracts/story/0,,631434,00.html
[11] Robert Baer interviewed on The Thom Hartmann Show June 9, 2006 http://www.911blogger.com/2006/06/former-cia-member-robert-baer-comments.html
[12] Robert Baer’s blurb for the revised and updated edition of David Ray Griffin’s Debunking 9/11 Debunking March 2007 http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-11-Mechanics-Defenders-Conspiracy/dp/product-description/156656686X
[13] Robert David Steele’s review of the book, 9/11 Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley Oct. 7, 2006 http://www.amazon.com/dp/0930852370
[14] Robet David Steele interviewed on The Alex Jones Show Oct. 27, 2006 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2006/271006googlecia.htm
[15] Letter to Congress signed by 25 intelligence service and law enforcement Sept. 13, 2004 http://www.pogo.org/m/hsp/hsp-911commission-040913.pdf

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

Alan Miller is author of the website http://www.PatriotsQuestion911.com

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

Video points finger at US Government as Responsible for Anthrax Attacks

RECENT ARTICLE: Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report – Official Account of 9/11 a "Joke" and a "Cover-up" Sept. 23, 2007 Link to full article
Summary: Seven CIA veterans denounce the official account of 9/11 as: "a joke", "a cover-up", "a monstrous series of lies", "a pretext for war", "not a serious piece of analysis", riddled with "serious shortcomings," "omissions," and "major flaws."

Senior Military, Intelligence, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials Question the 9/11 Commission Report

Many well known and respected senior U.S. military officers, intelligence services and law enforcement veterans, and government officials have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report or have made public statements that contradict the Report. Several even allege government complicity in the terrible acts of 9/11. This website is a collection of their statements. It is not an organization and it should be made clear that none of these individuals are affiliated with this website. Listed below are statements by more than 110 of these senior officials. Their collective voices give credibility to the claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is tragically flawed. These individuals cannot be simply dismissed as irresponsible believers in some 9/11 conspiracy theory. Their sincere concern, backed by their decades of service to their country, demonstrate that criticism of the Report is not irresponsible, illogical, nor disloyal, per se. In fact, it can be just the opposite.

(continued below)

Contact Your Local 9/11 Truth Group!
Demand a New 9/11 Investigation!

Be A "Man Among Men" - Be A "Cold Warrior"

I'm an American who joined the Rhodesian African Rifles to help out in what I saw as a fight against Communism. My African soldiers and I spent most of our time patrolling the Tribal Trust Lands looking for Communist Terrorists. We never saw this as a racial issue. It was an East vs. West Cold War Chapter. We always considered it an anti-communist campaign and never saw it any other way! A very few Americans arrived in Rhodesia with a racial agenda. Haters! The minute the Rhodesian authorities found out they had what they called a "racialist" on their hands they deported him-immediately! Usually lost on The West is that more than half of the Rhodesian troops were black and Anti-Communist! It was a privilege to command them.

Captain Joseph Columbus Smith, (Ret.), 1st Battalion, Rhodesian African Rifles

.................................................................................................................

While colleagues at SAIC say that Hatfill's clients adored him, some of them grew concerned about Hatfill this February, after The (Baltimore) Sun ran a story -- not mentioning Hatfill -- about a scientist who was seen taking biosafety cabinets from USAMRIID, at the same time that Hatfill lost his government-issued security clearance and consequently his job at SAIC. Why did he lose his clearance? One military official recounts the story he says Hatfill told him. In this telling, the difficulties began last summer, when Hatfill allegedly applied for a Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmentalized Information (TS/SCI) security clearance in order to bid for a top-secret contract with a government agency, perhaps the CIA.
To qualify for this clearance, he was reportedly required to take a polygraph test. Hatfill allegedly told the military official that he failed the polygraph on questions concerning his activities in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). The people conducting the polygraph were amateurs, Hatfill allegedly complained to his interlocutor; they couldn't understand what Cold Warriors like himself had to do in Rhodesia. The military official recalls Hatfill as saying that his father-in-law had been killed by rebels in Rhodesia, and that he had consequently undertaken some actions that caused concern when he was given his polygraph test.
http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2002/06/rozen-l-06-27.html

"He would talk about running around in the bush and throwing grenades in Zimbabwe and that sort of thing,"

Selous Scouts Recruiting Poster

Hatfill spent about 15 years in southern Africa, where he earned a string of academic degrees and disturbed many of his colleagues with his right-wing rhetoric and what appear to be tall tales of a heroic military career.

"He seems to have a Walter Mitty complex," said Edward Rybicki, who met Hatfill at the University of Cape Town, where Hatfill studied microbiology from 1987 to 1988.

Former colleagues recounted elaborate tales of heroism Hatfill told them.

He claimed to have served in the U.S. Army in Vietnam and was discharged after his plane was shot down and he broke his back. However, his military record showed none of that to be true.

He joined the military in 1975, as Vietnam was ending and was discharged in 1978.

In a 1997 resume, Hatfill claimed to be a member of the special forces. But Walter Solkowski, spokesman at Army Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, said Hatfill attended special forces training in 1976 but failed after a month. "He flunked. He was in training for only about 30 days," Solkowski said.

After completing his military service, Hatfill went to Rhodesia, where many former U.S. soldiers worked as mercenaries for the Selous Scouts, a military force that fought black rebels in an effort to maintain white rule in the southern African nation. Their efforts failed, and the country became black-led Zimbabwe in 1980.

Hatfill later bragged about serving with the Rhodesian Special Air Service and the Selous Scouts. Sources linked to Rhodesian security forces have no memory of him.

"He would talk about running around in the bush and throwing grenades in Zimbabwe and that sort of thing," Rybicki said. "He also boasted about shooting grenades into the Zimbabwe offices of the African National Congress, which was fighting to overthrow white rule in South Africa" , Rybicki said.

Former Rhodesian leader Ian Smith dies

Cris Chinaka Harare, Zimbabwe
21 November 2007 09:09


Ian Smith, who defied the world in 1965 when he led 270 000 white Rhodesians in a unilateral declaration of independence from Britain rather than accept moves to black-majority rule, has died in South Africa aged 88.

State-owned radio ZBC, reporting his death, said "Smith will be remembered for his racism and for the deaths of many Zimbabweans."

"Smith became prime minister of white-ruled Rhodesia in 1964 and remained in office until a guerrilla war forced him to accept a ceasefire and political settlement in 1979.

Elections were held the following year, when Rhodesia became the black-ruled republic of Zimbabwe, with Robert Mugabe as prime minister.

Born in the small Southern Rhodesian mining town of Selukwe on April 8 1919, the son of a farmer, Ian Douglas Smith was educated locally and at Rhodes University in Grahamstown, South Africa, where he obtained a bachelor of commerce degree.

"Good Old Smithy" to his white followers -- stayed on in the black-ruled republic of Zimbabwe after independence in 1980, keeping a critical eye on those who had defeated him, and vehemently opposing Mugabe's plans for a one-party state.

As a fighter pilot in Britain's Royal Air Force during World War II, he was shot down twice and underwent plastic surgery after his first crash left him with a permanently lop-sided face which made it almost impossible for him to smile.

He personified white intransigence.When Smith became prime minister, neighbouring states were nearing black-ruled independence. But Smith -- with the support of the white Rhodesians -- set himself firmly against the aspirations of five million blacks.

Smith remained vocal in opposition to Mugabe, even after the parliamentary seats reserved for whites were abolished in 1987.

Although he occupied no formal position after leaving Parliament, he retained a place in the heart of a white minority much shrunken by emigration.

Ironically, like Mugabe now, Smith routinely berated Britain for what he branded interference in Rhodesia's domestic affairs and dwelled on this subject at length in his autobiography, The Great Betrayal.

He moved to Cape Town four years ago for health reasons.

Over the years, Mugabe has suggested his government could have hanged Smith and his closest allies for war crimes and human rights abuses.

"If we were vindictive, if we had not pursued a policy of reconciliation for which our detractors don't give us any credit, that head that Smith carries should have been chopped," Mugabe has said repeatedly.

Officials in Mugabe's government said on Tuesday that Smith -- who in 1976 declared he didn't believe in black majority rule, "not in a thousand years" -- would not be missed.

"Smith will not be mourned or missed here by any decent person because he was an unrepentant racist whose racist stance and opposition to our independence caused a war, and he was responsible for a lot of deaths and suffering," Deputy Information Minister Bright Matonga told Reuters.

Mugabe dismisses white Zimbabweans opposed to his rule as hankering for Smith's racist Rhodesia.

The white population, estimated to have shrunk to about 40 000, has kept a low political profile since often violent farm seizures by Mugabe's supporters started seven years ago.

A once-clean shaven Smith grew a long grey beard in his 80s. But old age didn't stop his attacks on Mugabe, calling him a terrorist and communist who ruined Zimbabwe's economy.

Although afflicted with a stoop in later life, he still enjoyed showing visitors his herd of cattle on a ranch he had tended for decades.

In 1985, to Mugabe's fury, the Conservative Alliance of Zimbabwe, the party Smith led until 1987, won 15 of the 20 white seats in Parliament.

Smith queued up with the aid of a walking stick at the age of 82 to vote against Mugabe in March 2002 presidential elections. - Reuters

Basson ("Dr. Death") hearing postponed - prosecutors said they were "embarrassed by the testimony of their own expert witness"

Basson hearing postponed
Sapa
Published:Nov 20, 2007

Related Content
Basson prosecutors ask for postponement
Docket of death

The hearing of germ warfare expert Wouter Basson has been postponed until September next year, after prosecutors said they were embarrassed by the testimony of their own expert witness.
They asked for a postponement to contact more experts to testify.
Basson was facing six charges brought against him at the Health Professions Council of SA (HPCSA) to which he pleaded not guilty.
The charges brought by some of his peers relate to Basson’s time as head of the apartheid government’s chemical and biological warfare project and could see him lose his licence to practice medicine if he is found guilty.
On Monday, arguing on behalf of the prosecution, Professor Solomon Benatar, an expert on ethics, said Basson’s actions did not fit the description of the duties and responsibilities of a medical professional.
He argued that Basson was guilty of professional misconduct.
But after a gruelling cross examination by Basson’s lawyer, Adv Jaap Cilliers SC, Benatar said he "increasingly" saw difficulty with the charges brought against Basson at the HPSCA .
On Tuesday, Adv Marius Helberg SC, the pro-forma prosecutor said his team was embarrassed by the evidence of Benatar.
"The witness made concessions that he should not have made," Helberg said.
Cilliers said it would not help the prosecution to call another witness to contradict Benatar.
"Are they expecting you to do a head count with two saying no and one saying yes?" Cilliers said.
He said if the expert witness called by the prosecution made concessions that favoured the defence, that should be accepted.
The committee hearing the case said the reasons given by the prosecution for the request for a postponement were questionable but, however, still granted it for logistical reasons.

"The danger of anthrax persists… ask Steven Hatfill"

cfybha

Persiste el peligro del ántrax... pregúntenle a Steven Hatfill

Gabriel Moyssen
Viernes, 16 de noviembre de 2007

ÁNTRAX, PELIGRO LATENTE

En el sexto aniversario del martes negro, el presidente George W. Bush y las autoridades judiciales y policiacas de Estados Unidos eludieron una vez más informar sobre los resultados de la investigación de los ataques con polvo de ántrax que siguieron al derrumbe de las Torres Gemelas, matando a cinco personas en Nueva York, Nueva Jersey, Florida y Connecticut en uno de los capítulos más oscuros y olvidados de la "guerra contra el terrorismo".
[On the sixth anniversary of Black Tuesday, President George W. Bush and the judicial and police authorities of the United States once again eluded to inform on the results of the investigation of the attacks with anthrax dust that followed the collapse of the Twin Towers, killing five people in New York, New Jersey, Florida and Connecticut in one of the darkest and forgotten chapters in the “war against terrorism"]

El tema, por demás importante, ya que ayudó a crear una cortina de humo en torno a los atentados de El Kaida y la invasión de Afganistán, al desatar el pánico mundial por las "armas biológicas de destrucción masiva" -cuya presunta eliminación fue uno de los argumentos para ocupar Irak, igual que ahora Washington "denuncia" el programa nuclear iraní-, vuelve a suscitar interés, luego de que el miércoles expertos de seguridad y James Woolsey, director de la CIA en 1993-95, advirtieron que EU "está pobremente preparado" ante el peligro del ántrax.
[The subject, beside the point important, since it helped to create a smoke screen around the attacks of the Kaida and the invasion of Afghanistan, when untying the world-wide panic by the “biological weapons of massive destruction” - whose presumed elimination was one of the arguments to occupy Iraq, just as now Washington “denounces” the Iranian nuclear program, returns to provoke interest, after which expert Wednesday of security and James Woolsey, director of the company in 1993-95, noticed that the USA is “poorly prepared” before the danger of the anthrax.]

"Las armas biológicas, si son utilizadas con inteligencia, tienen el poder de liquidar a cientos de miles de personas e incluso a millones, en la escala del armamento atómico, pero con relativa simpleza en su fabricación. Estamos hablando de integrar y operar algo tan poco complicado como la cervecería de un restaurante", enfatizó Woolsey durante la presentación en la capital norteamericana de un informe elaborado por la consultoría ExecutiveAction. Su titular, Neil Livingstone, recalcó que el país debe desarrollar una vacuna y medicamentos más eficaces contra el mal, así como medios para su detección.
[“The biological weapons, if they are used with intelligence, have the power to even eliminate to hundreds of thousands of people and to million, in the scale of the atomic armament, but with relative simpleza in their manufacture. We are speaking to integrate and to operate something so little complicated as the brewery of a restaurant ", emphasized Woolsey during the presentation in the North American capital of a report elaborated by the ExecutiveAction consultancy. His holder, Neil Livingstone, stressed that the country must develop to a vaccine and more effective medicines against badly, as well as average for its detection.]

El documento plantea tres escenarios catástroficos: el lanzamiento de esporas de ántrax -como las que se emplearon en 2001- en el metro neoyorquino; en un cine de Minneapolis, un casino de Las Vegas y un parque de diversiones en California, al igual que en la ceremonia del Oscar, "matando actores famosos". Por eso, Livingstone subrayó que "el Congreso debe involucrarse ahora mismo y el gobierno necesita dar prioridad al asunto".
[The document raises three catastrophic scenes: the launching of esporas of anthrax - like which they were used in 2001 - in the New York meter; in a cinema of Minneapolis, a casino of Fertile valleys and a park of diversions in California, like in the ceremony of the Oscar, “killing famous actors”. For that reason, Livingstone emphasized that “the Congress must become jumbled right now and the government needs to give priority to the subject”.]

Vacuna
[Vaccine]

Cabe mencionar que la vacuna del ántrax, polémica por los daños que causaría al organismo, no se vende al público y sólo se aplica a las tropas desplegadas en Irak, Afganistán y Surcorea. En diciembre el gobierno federal terminó un acuerdo de 877.5 millones de dólares con la firma VaxGen Inc. para adquirir dosis de uso civil; el mes pasado se informó que hasta 100 millones de dólares se habrían desperdiciado por la falta de coordinación en los inventarios de los departamentos de Defensa y de Salud y Servicios Humanos, que compraron la vacuna a BioThrax.
[It is possible to mention that the vaccine of the anthrax, controversy by the damages that it would cause to the organism, is not sold the public and is only applied to the troops unfolded in Iraq, Afghanistan and South Korea. In December the federal government finished an agreement of 877,5 million dollars with Inc. the VaxGen company in order to acquire dose of civil use; the last month inquired that up to 100 million dollars the departments inventories of of Defense and Health and Human Service would have been wasted by the lack of coordination in, that bought the vaccine to BioThrax.]

La averiguación de los misteriosos ataques con cartas llenas de esporas en octubre de 2001 -incluso los senadores demócratas Tom Daschle y Patrick Leahy recibieron en sus oficinas sobres con carbunco granulado-, al parecer se halla estancada, aunque su efecto psicológico fue tan impactante como las escenas de los aviones estrellándose en el Centro del Comercio Mundial y facilitó la aprobación de la Ley Patriota. Al empezar las pesquisas, la FBI se enfocó en el físico y virólogo Steven Hatfill, cuya vivienda en Alexandria, Virginia, fue cateada por agentes mientras la procuraduría general lo declaraba "persona de interés" en la investigación.
[The inquiry of the mysterious attacks with letters full of esporas in October of 2001 - the democratic senators Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy even received in their offices you exceed with carbunco granulated, apparently is suspended, although its psychological effect was as impressive as the scenes of the airplanes crashing in center of World-wide Comercio and facilitated the approval of the Patriotic Law. When beginning the searches, FBI focused in the physicist and virólogo Steven Hatfill, whose house in Alexandria, Virginia, was searched by agents while the general office of the judge advocate general declared “person of interest” in the investigation.]

Barbara Rosenberg, especialista de la Federación de Científicos Estadounidenses, acusó abiertamente a Hatfill como responsable de los atentados, aunque señaló que Bush carecía de voluntad política para reconocer que la CIA patrocinó un experimento para enviar ántrax por correo y que el programa secreto de armas biológicas, en el que trabajó Hatfill, salió de control.
[Barbara Rosenberg, specialist of the Federation of American Scientists, openly blamed Hatfill like person in charge of the attacks, although she indicated that Bush lacked political will to recognize that the company it sponsored an experiment to send anthrax by mail and that the secret program of biological weapons, in which Hatfill worked, left control.]

No se han presentado cargos contra el experto, que falsificó parte de su curriculum e inició su carrera profesional al servicio de las dictaduras racistas de Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) y Suráfrica. En cambio, Hatfill, quien sostiene que su vida fue "destrozada", ha demandado por sumas millonarias a varios diarios y revistas, así como al exsecretario de Justicia, John Ashcroft.
[Positions against the expert have not appeared, who falsified part of his curriculum and initiated his professional race to the service of the racist dictatorships of Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and South Africa. However, Hatfill, who maintains that its life “was destroyed”, has demanded by millionaire sums to several newspapers and magazines, as well as to the exsecretario of Justice, John Ashcroft.]

Join the dots.......Osama, George, William, Ibrahim, Fuad, et al.

Home : WRH Store : WRH Index : Reader Letters : Archives : Advertise : Donate

Bin Laden Profits from US Anthrax Vaccine Manufacture?
By Ian Gurney.
Author of "The Cassandra Prophecy."
www.caspro.com

It's a story straight off the pages of a John Le Carre or Robet Ludlum thriller. A mysterious Lebanese millionaire, who already owns telecoms companies in Venezuela and El Salvador, uses his influence to take over the sole manufacture, production and distribution of one of Americas most sought after defence products. Meanwhile, the world's most wanted terrorist appears to be profiting from his family's investment in the self same manufacturing process, assisted by no less a personage than the father of the President of the United States. Sounds fanciful?
Well, on December 1st. last year the Pakistan News Service announced that documents belonging to a United States company called BioPort Corporation were found in the possession of the al-Qaeda in Kabul, Afghanistan. Seven weeks later, on January 16th, the United States Food and Drug Administration, which had, since 1999 prohibited BioPort from manufacture and production at its Michigan laboratories, announced that it had given its conditional approval for BioPort to begin the manufacture, production and shipping of its product to the US military. On February 1st. the US government gave BioPort Corp a green light on to resume production that had been shut down by the Food and Drug Administration for three years.
So, exactly what is BioPort, what do they produce and who runs the company? Well, BioPort, based in North Lansing, Michigan, is the only corporation in the United States with a license to make the Anthrax vaccine. Except that BioPort doesn't actually make the vaccine, BioPort simply bought the laboratory that does make the vaccine, Michigan Biologic Products Institute, from the State of Michigan in 1998.
Less than a month after it took over the business, BioPort acquired Michigan Biologic Products Institute's sole and exclusive customer for the Anthrax vaccine, the US Department of Defence, and an exclusive $29 million contract with the Department of Defence to "manufacture, test, bottle and store the anthrax vaccine." The Pentagon agreed to pay BioPort $4.70 per shot and each member of the armed forces, that's 2.4 million soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, is supposed to get six shots over an 18-month period. That’s a huge, guaranteed market for BioPort’s product. Indeed, according to former Central Intelligence Agency military analyst Patrick Eddington, the estimated $60 million worth of anthrax vaccine BioPort is expected to produce for the Defence Department over the next five years could just be the beginning.
"The Pentagon has a $322 million, 10-year programme to develop at least three, and perhaps as many as a dozen additional biological warfare vaccines, making BioPort a huge profit." Eddington told ABCNews. However, since acquiring Michigan Biologic Products Institute, BioPort has only delivered a small amount of the anthrax vaccine to the US Defence Department. In fact, just 4% of the vaccine contracted for has so far been delivered because Food and Drug Administration audits uncovered suspicious record keeping as well as security and contamination problems at BioPort's laboratories, causing the FDA to ban delivery of the product until a few days ago.
So now lets look at who owns and runs BioPort Corporation. Let's begin with Admiral William J. Crowe Jr. former Head of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and a former US ambassador to Great Britain. It seems that back when President George H. W. Bush was setting up Osama Bin Laden as a "freedom fighter" (Afghanistan's "freedom fighters" were credited with shooting down more than 270 Soviet aircraft using American made Stinger missiles in the 1980's) the good Admiral and his associates on the Joint Chiefs of Staff were, according to some reports, selling American made weapons-grade Anthrax to Saddam Hussein in the hopes that he would use it against Iran. These days Admiral Crowe sits on the Board of Directors and owns 13% of BioPort Corp.
According to ABC News reporter Howard L. Rosenberg: "BioPort Corp. was created solely to take over the assets of Michigan Biologic Products Institute by Admiral Crowe, his partners in a company called Intervac L.L.C. and a group of former managers of the Michigan-based institute."
It is Intervac that has the most interesting history here. According to Crowe’s associate and spokesman, Jay Coupe, Crowe owns 22.5 percent of Intervac shares, although he hasn’t "invested a penny" in the venture. Another 30 percent of Intervac shares are owned by Nancy El-Hibri, a mother and homemaker in suburban Maryland and the rest of the company is in the hands of "I&F Holdings," a company directed by Nancy El-Hibri’s father-in-law, Ibrahim El-Hibri, a Venezuelan citizen, and her husband, Fuad El-Hibri, a German citizen of Lebanese descent. According to Coupe, when Crowe returned from England in 1997, he was approached by Fuad El-Hibri’s father, Ibrahim El-Hibri. The elder El-Hibri, whom the admiral had met a decade before, invited Crowe to serve on the board of Intervac.
Fuad El-Hibri appears to be the real day-to-day director of Intervac and is listed by Dun & Bradstreet as the "chief executive" of Bioport. The reclusive Ibrahim El Hibri, who grants no interviews, has homes in Caracas, Maryland, Paris and Beirut, which he visits all year around, being careful of avoiding tax residence in any of them. Where he got his millions is a mystery. He invested in Porton International, a British pharmaceutical firm where his son worked, in the early 90’s and according to a US Congressional review, Porton International sold anthrax vaccines to the Saudi Arabian Government. In Venezuela, Ibrahim El Hibri runs the country’s third largest cell phone operator Digitel, despite having sold control of the company to Telecom Italia Mobile. Meanwhile in El Salvador, his son Fuad El Hibri, finds the time to run Digicel, a cellular telephone concession which the family bought two years ago.
After the attacks of September 11th. President Bush placed BioPort's North Lansing laboratory under protection, invoking the national interest. Interestingly enough, the Italian magazine Il Manifesto reported, in its October issue, that this happened at the same time that the FBI also placed the El Hibri’s at the top of their list of suspects for sending anthrax spores through the mail system.
So, it seems that Admiral Crowe, the El-Hibris and their fellow investors in BioPort are set to make a nice profit from the Anthrax scare. And who are those fellow investors? Reports in the US media, denied by BioPort, have suggested that one major investor in the company is the Carlyle Group, one of America's most successful investment companies, well known for generating "extraordinary returns" for its customers through investments in the US defence industry. Because the Carlyle Group remains privately held, it is not required to disclose details of its investments or business activities, it has, however, an impressive array of board members. Former President George Bush Sr. and former UK Prime Minister John Major are directors of The Carlyle Group, as are other top US Republicans including former Secretary of State James A. Baker, and former Defence Secretary and deputy CIA Director Frank Carlucci.
Now comes the interesting part of this story. According to reports in the US media, until October last year a major investor with The Carlyle Group was (and you had better sit down before you read this) the bin Laden family! For many years The Carlyle Group has maintained financial ties with the family of Osama bin Laden, but those links were supposedly severed after September 11th. when it was agreed that the relationship was becoming a tad embarrassing for all concerned.
The story behind the Carlyle Group and the links between George Bush Sr. and the bin Ladens is fascinating to say the least.
In the 1970's, Salem Bin Laden, the eldest of Osama Bin Laden's 55 brothers and sisters, invested heavily in George H. W. Bush's first business venture, Arbusto Energy. Salem became Bush's business partner through James Bath, a close friend of the future American president. Salem appointed Bath as his representative in Houston, Texas. It was Bath who invested $50,000 in Bush's company Arbusto and also bought Houston Gulf Airport on behalf of Osama's elder brother. Since then business links between Bush Sr. and the Bin Laden family have flourished, particularly since Bush Sr. joined the Carlyle Group. On September 27th. last year The Wall Street Journal reported that:
"George H.W. Bush, the father of President Bush, works for the bin Laden family business in Saudi Arabia through the Carlyle Group, an international investment consulting firm. The senior Bush has met with the bin Laden family at least twice.
Osama bin Laden has supposedly been "disowned" by his family, which runs the Saudi Bin Laden Group, a multi-billion dollar construction business in Saudi Arabia. However, Osama's sister-in-law, in a recent interview with America's ABC News, said that she believed that members of her family still supported Osama bin Laden.
If the rumours are correct about the Carlyle Group's investment in BioPort, then it's quite possible the bin Laden family is an investor in the only company able to make Anthrax vaccine in the United States, and because their beloved Osama might have some of the stuff, the family will make a fortune. In fact, the shortage of vaccine created by the now withdrawn FDA ban will make all those involved in BioPort extremely wealthy, as market forces drive the price of the vaccine up. A very cosy arrangement. The Bushes, El Hibri's and bin Ladens (and the occasional complicit Admiral) could all be making money off the fear and death of Americans. Is it any wonder, then, that documents relating to BioPort were found in the possession of bin Laden's al-Qaeda network in Kabul?

Copyright: Ian Gurney. 2002.

See also: Anthrax and 9/11 - Index of What Really Happened

"Half of my colleagues believe that (Hatfill) carried (the attacks) out, and half believe he's innocent."

U.S. Remains Vulnerable to Anthrax Attack

November 15, 2007 - 5:55am
By MICHAEL WALSH

Capital News Service

WASHINGTON - The United States is still "very poorly prepared" for an anthrax attack six years after a 2001 attack targeted Congress and television broadcasters, said a former Central Intelligence Agency director Wednesday.

"There is very little attention being paid to biological weapons," said former CIA director James Woolsey. "And that's a shame."

Woolsey spoke at a news conference called to release a report from ExecutiveAction, a Washington, D.C.-based consultant, analyzing three anthrax attack scenarios, including a hypothetical attack at the Academy Awards.

Neil Livingston, ExecutiveAction chief executive officer, said the report was meant to be an "educational document" for the public and to show the risks that America faces.

"Although much has been done to prepare for an attack, we are still vulnerable," he said.

Speakers were concerned about the ability of terrorists to get anthrax through doctors and scientists.

"Terrorists could recruit a scientist at a laboratory who had access to a lethal strain of anthrax," Livingston said. "Alternatively, they could break into a laboratory, bribe a scientist or threaten a scientist to obtain a sample."

Livingston said that once obtained, anthrax "can be smuggled into just about any building in the United States."

"Someone could just open up a sugar packet (filled with anthrax), spread it on a table and then leave the room," he said.

Livingston pointed to the mystery that still surrounds the 2001 attack -- that struck in Florida, Connecticut, New York and metropolitan D.C. -- as evidence that anthrax is on the back burner.

Stephen (sic) Hatfill, a Fort Detrick scientist, was a person of interest in the attacks, but was not charged. Five people died in the attack.

"The most alarming thing is that we have not solved the 2001 anthrax attacks," Livingston said. "Half of my colleagues believe that (Hatfill) carried (the attacks) out, and half believe he's innocent."

Though the amount of anthrax used in the attacks was small, it was still enough to shut down the Hart Senate Office Building for five months and require millions of dollars in decontamination costs.

If terrorists were to step up the amounts of anthrax or "get creative" in another attack, the results could be devastating beyond the loss of life, said David Wright, president of the Annapolis-based biodefense company PharmAthene.

"A one-gallon, Ziploc bag of anthrax is enough to destroy the U.S. economy," Wright said. "I don't want to scare people, but this is scary."

The report also focused on the aftermath of an attack, and called for increased stockpiles of antibiotics, therapeutics (which provide protection after antibiotics lose their effectiveness) and a modern vaccine.

The anthrax vaccine is solely available to the military and is a six-shot sequence, Livingston said.

Wright said the federal government needs to step up its funding through Project Bioshield, a program created in 2004 to provide medical countermeasures in case of a biological attack.

Bioshield has received $5.6 billion in funding so far, a "good first step" but far short of what is needed to protect the American people, Wright said.

"We need to be more aggressive," he said. "We hope this report will be a call to action."

Wright estimated that between $40 billon and $50 billion would be needed for Project Bioshield, calling the funding now a "drop in the bucket."

"Even with a blank check it would take us two years to protect the American people (from an anthrax attack)," Wright said.

Livingston said the money would be well worth the devastation the nation could avoid.

Speakers said the next anthrax attack is a matter of "when," not "if."

Woolsey's belief in the inevitability of a biological terrorist attack is derived from the terrorist mindset.

"There's nothing in those beliefs that puts a constraint on dying horribly while killing massively," he said.

Woolsey said the fanaticism of terrorists makes him nostalgic for the days of the Cold War.

"I don't miss the oppression of eastern Europe," Woolsey said. "But there are days when I miss the Soviets when I think of Al Qaeda and Hezbollah.

"The Soviets were a difficult enemy but one we could deter and contain."

(Copyright 2007 by Capital News Service. All Rights Reserved.)

Senator Patrick Leahy believes "people within the US government know the source of the anthrax powder."

Going CRAZY in America!
WARNING!!..THIS BLOG AND ANYTHING U DO ONLINE MAY BE OPENLY TAPPED, MONITORED, RECORDED ETC..DON'T SAY OR DO ANYTHING U MIGHT REGRET LATER.. NOW THANK THE CONGRESS FOR MAKING AMERICA SAFE!!

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

Post 9/11 Anthrax Scare: What happened? and Where is the investigation going??

"The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its FBI case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on September 18, 2001. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two Democratic U.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. The crime remains unsolved. Senator Patrick Leahy, one of the recipients of an anthrax letter, publicly stated just before the sixth anniversary of the case that he believes people within the US government know the source of the anthrax powder" Source"

Even after the most extensive manhunt in its history, the FBI is not able to identify the perpetrator of the anthrax letters. The story presented here, however, leads to the suspicion that the anthrax attacks of October 2001 were an inside job. There is a further piece of circumstantial evidence: it is highly improbable that weapon-grade anthrax can be fabricated by any laboratory in the global south.On 28 November 2003, Gary Matsumoto reported in Science magazine ("Bioterrorism: Anthrax Powder: State of the Art" [subscription only]) that the technology used for the extremely fine particles contained in the letters, especially those sent to Patrick Leahy and Thomas Daschle, is so cutting-edge that bio-weapons experts have concluded that nobody can procure anthrax of this quality without substantial state support.

The writer concludes: "If the Senate anthrax powder did in fact have these refinements, its manufacture required a unique combination of factors: a strain (of the bacteria) that originated in the United States, arcane knowledge, and specialized facilities for production and containment. And this raises the discomforting possibility that the powder was made in America, perhaps with the resources of the U.S. government." Source

"Steven Hatfill, a medical doctor and an expert on viruses, was outed in a drumbeat of news reports that included aerial shots of the FBI seizing property from his apartment, including his trash.And then-Attorney General John Ashcroft confirmed on television that Hatfill was a "person of interest."But instead of the FBI nailing Hatfill, he filed his lawsuit claiming that with their leaks, the FBI and Justice Department had violated his presumption of innocence and destroyed his reputation."I object to an investigation characterized, as this one has been, by outrageous official statements, calculated leaks to the media, and causing a feeding frenzy operating to my great prejudice," he said in August, 2002.In the lawsuit, Hatfill is turning the tables on the FBI: the hunted is dragging the hunters into court. Top officials were deposed on videotape, like John Ashcroft, who was less than forthcoming." Source

"1) The anthrax was genetically identified as being the Ames strain. All the anthrax came from this strain. Ames is a very potent variety developed in American germ labs. This strain has since been distributed to about 20 labs. It is always possible that other labs in the world may have attained access to it illicitly. However, to the best of knowledge, this is a specifically American anthrax.

2) The anthrax was expertly weaponized. Some of the letters contained anthrax equal in quality to the best attainable by American labs. More revealingly, the process by which this quality was attained appears to mirror that used by American bioweaponeers. Specifically, the anthrax was not milled, used a very particular form of silica and had a special coating. All of these trains are unique to the state-of-the-art used by American labs. In contrast, the anthrax definitely did not use the inferior processes used by some rogue states, such as Iraq.

3) About 10g of anthrax was used in the attacks. Weapons scientists and experts testified that it would be extremely difficult for 10g of anthrax to be stolen from a weapons lab by outsiders, given the extraordinary security layers at these labs. However, these same experts testified that it would be easy for an insider to take a miniscule sample and then grow the anthrax himself at some other location.

4) Working with anthrax is dangerous. In particular, the process of placing the spores in an open letter is extremely hazardous. Therefore it is highly probable that the terrorist had been vaccinated for anthrax. As of 2001 only a very few people received this vaccine, all of them workers in American labs. " Source

Looking at the facts, looks like an inside job (well, hasn't been proven still facts point that way). i checked FBI's page on anthrax case and there is not major latest development in investigation, meaning the perp is still at large, free and fine.bio terrorism is serious business and government has to take this seriously. FBI has 17(looks kind of small number to me, experts may disagree) agents investigating this and yet after 6 years there is no arrest, suspect or any strong lead. i don't know about you but i am scared.

Posted by Bhumika Ghimire at 11:47 AM

Labels: 9/11, anthrax scare, bio terrorism

"an international man of mystery, and a whirlwind in the sack....."

Steve Hatfill Addresses America

August 17, 2002

By Jay LeBoeuf

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Steve Hatfill. I'm a medical doctor, a biomedical scientist, an international man of mystery, and a whirlwind in the sack.
I am a loyal American. I love my country. And when I say my country, I mean the USA, and not Rhodesia or South Africa, both of which I have also loved, but not anymore, for various reasons.
I called you out here today to tell you all that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the mailing of the anthrax letters that terrorized America over ten months ago. And furthermore, anyone in the press or biomedical community who contends or suggests that I was somehow involved in these horrific acts is asking for an envelope full of finely milled, weaponized payback, if you get my drift.
Yes, it's true that, in the course of my multifaceted career, I have worked for most of the heads sprouting from the shoulders of that thrashing hydra known as the military-industrial-intelligence complex.
And yes, it's true that, over the last three decades, I have amassed an impressive background in all manner of biological terror methods and techniques. I was considered such an expert, in fact, that I was hired by UNSCOM to go into Iraq after the Gulf War and seek out Saddam's biological weapons stockpiles.
And yes, it's true that I was once commissioned by the government to do a study on the feasibility of sending anthrax through the mail as a terrorism method.
And yes, it's true that I wrote a novel a couple years ago, explaining in excruciating detail the exact methods by which a bio-terror attack could be waged against the Congress.
One misconception I want to clear up right now, however, is this notion that I personally worked with anthrax bacteria. In fact, I am a virologist, not a bacteriologist. My specialty is with the Ebola virus and monkeypox, not anthrax. It was an entirely different kind of laboratory-created genocide I was researching there at Fort Detrick... which happens to be the place where the anthrax that was used in the terror attacks most likely came from, and is also where my UNSCOM partner colonel David Franz was stationed... but so what? If I say I never touched the stuff, I never touched it. Case closed. "My word is bond," as we used to say in the Selous.
Besides which, surely, none of the above-mentioned facts gives the FBI the right to hassle me, or to give me the business.
Ladies and gentlemen of the press, I am here today to let you know that the FBI has, indeed, been hassling me. And what's more, they have been giving me the business.
Allow me to fill in some details… Last fall, two FBI came by my office and asked me to take a polygraph test. I jumped at the chance. Later, a polygraph was administered and, after reviewing the charts, the examiner told me that I had passed. I had nothing to do with the anthrax letters! So it should have been case closed, right? You'd think I would be in the clear, right? Continuing to hassle me would be, like, double jeopardy, right? As it turns out, no… that's wrong. Three times wrong.
A few months after those first FBI interviews and the polygraph, the private sector got involved. I got a call from a reporter who all but accused me of mailing the anthrax letters. Two days later, a former colleague told me that this same reporter had phoned him and made similar accusations. Let me tell you, I hadn't been that upset since way back in my Selous Scout days, when I was part of the white supremacist counterinsurgency forces fighting black rebels in Rhodesia, and a mysterious outbreak of anthrax killed two hundred villagers, not too far from where I was quartered at the time.
So now, all of a sudden, the FBI starts hassling me again. They want to sweep my apartment again, and they want to bring their hounds this time. Those dogs went nuts! They just tore the hell out of the place. And do you know who had to clean it up? Me. That's who. And along with the hounds, they brought TV crews, helicopters, and a huge truck full of hazardous-materials technicians all decked out in their moonsuits. The neighbors were aghast. Needless to say, I was mortified.
And now, after all that, they're talking about placing me under surveillance! Or even getting a handwriting expert to compare my writing to that on the anthrax letters. Just because of some loopy coincidence involving the return address on the letters having some similarities to a neighborhood near where I lived in Rhodesia. Handwriting experts! The ultimate invasion of privacy! I mean, what do they take me for, some kind of Arab?!
Which reminds me... I wish to object in the strongest possible terms to having my character assassinated by reference to events from my past which bear absolutely no relationship to the question of who the anthrax killer is.
Did I mention I was a member of Rhodesia's Selous Scouts?
Besides, how bad could I possibly be if, as the New York Times has recently revealed, the Bush administration is still allowing me to go on semi-covert operations in Central Asia under an assumed identity? Do you really think the US Government would still be making use of my services if they thought I was in any way responsible for the attempted bio-terror assassination of the Democratic leadership in Congress and the Senate? An assassination attempt that led to the accidental deaths of five innocent people?
Come on!
But enough chit-chat. The time has come for me to wrap this up, and get down to brass tacks. Basically, gentlemen, I know you're listening, and it all boils down to this: I will not be railroaded.
I am a loyal white American. I am extremely proud of the work I have done for the United States and for my country and her people. Even the stuff I'm not so proud of anymore, I'm still kinda proud of it. If this investigation continues to go the way it has been, and I am backed into a corner, I want certain individuals to know that I'm no fool. I didn't walk into this thing ass-backwards, you know. Certain guarantees were made, and I expect those guarantees to be honored. I know you know I know things. I know you know I know how to protect myself. I won't let you make me your Lee Harvey Oswald.
So go ahead, keep pushing. See what it gets you. See how long your house of cards can stand up to the hurricane of truth, if it is ever unleashed. And trust me gentlemen, if anything happens to me, it WILL be unleashed.
I bid you all a good afternoon.

Editor's Note: Dr. Hatfill's actual public statement may be read in it's entirety

here.

Other sources:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/13/opinion/13KRIS.html

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jul2002/anth-j03.shtml

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=134396

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/01/26/assaad/index_np.html

Always ducking, weaving and deceiving...........

Friday, November 02, 2007

FOIA Introduction

FOIA Basics

- What is the FOIA?

- Who can I send a FOIA request to?

- What are the FOIA exemptions?

- How can I obtain agency records without using the FOIA?

- What does it cost to make a FOIA request?

- What happens after I make a request?

- How can I appeal an adverse response?

- What else should I know?

- What unexpected problems might I encounter?

- Sample FOIA Requests

- Sample FOIA Appeals

Making the FOIA Work for You

Follow a Request Through the FOIA Process (pdf)

Classification of Government Information

Archive's Audits of FOIA Administration

Open Government News

Noteworthy News Stories Made Possible by FOIA Documents

Government Guidance, Directives and Statistics on FOIA

Legislative History of FOIA

Archive's Litigation (coming soon)

International FOIA

FOIA Links

FOIA in the News - 2002-2003

13. "Former Army Scientist Forged Ph.D. Certificate, School Says"

By Scott Shane, The Baltimore Sun, 9 October 2002

As the media broke the story that Dr. Steven J. Hatfill, a former Army bioweapons scientist had been claiming to have a Ph.D. he never received, Dr. Hatfill defended himself by claiming he had completed the work for the degree at Rhodes University in South Africa and "assumed" the degree had been granted. When applying for a research job in 1995, Hatfill provided the National Institutes of Health with a handsome Rhodes University Ph.D. certificate in molecular cell biology with his name on it, signed by the university vice chancellor and other officials. A copy of the Ph.D. certificate was obtained by The Baltimore Sun from the NIH under the Freedom of Information Act. Rhodes University officials say the certificate is a forgery. The university seal is not in the right place, the vice chancellor's signature has the wrong middle initial and other names are made up.