the Anthrax Attacks
This is no
longer the main
page of this web site.
To view comments,
etc. after December 31, 2008, click HERE.
My original analysis
hypothesis, and everything from prior to January 1, 2005,
can still be accessed by
This web site was started on November 22, 2001,
keep track of facts related to the
anthrax attacks which had become a major news event during the previous
month. I found that most people only wanted to discuss beliefs,
and conspiracy theories. I wanted to see what the facts
said. Plus, news stories were appearing and then being deleted,
I needed a place to retain the articles which contained new
I didn't expect the investigation to last very
But it did. And my analysis of the facts
became more and more detailed as I examined the handwriting on the
various conspiracy theories, the nature of the anthrax, the nature of
As the years passed, the site got bigger and
until people who only had dial-up modems started complaining that it
taking forever to access the main page just to see if there was any
or any new comments. So, early in 2005 I created the new "first
which you are now reading and froze the
main page, leaving it basically as it was at that time.
In addition, in December of 2004, some key facts
suddenly fallen into place for me, facts which - when viewed from the
angle - suddenly revealed exactly how the media got nearly
about the case so terribly wrong. That realization seemed to wrap
up my analysis, as far as I was concerned. All
that I needed from that point on was to see if my analysis was correct
or incorrect. On March 1, 2005, I self-published my book "Analyzing
The Anthrax Attacks" to summarize my analysis. (The key
about how the media got onto the wrong track is detailed in the Sample
Chapter.) My primary findings were as follows (on Aug. 6,
striking through findings which appear to
been proven wrong):
|1. Dr. Steven Jay Hatfill is
of any connection to the anthrax attacks, and his life was ruined by a
band of politically-motivated conspiracy theorists who conned the
media, the public and government officials into forcing the FBI to
investigate him. Links: 1 - 2
- 3 - 4
- 5 - 6
- 7 - CONFIRMED
2. The culprit almost certainly
a child to write the anthrax letters and to address the anthrax
Links: 1 - 2
3. In the tense and panicky
days of the investigation, mistakes were made at USAMRIID and the Armed
Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) which were unfortunately leaked to
the media. The result was that the silly mistakes and false
were turned into false headlines which misled the world and continue to
mislead the world about the nature of the attack anthrax to this
Links: 1 - 2
- 3 - CONFIRMED
4. Despite all the erroneous
and made up theories, the attack anthrax did not contain any visible
as so many scientists and media people believe. That basic
has caused much of the scientific community and the media to look in
wrong direction for the culprit. Links: 1
- 2 - 3
- 4 - 5
- 6 - 7
- 8 - 9
- 10 - 11
- 12 - 13
- 14 - 15
- 16 - 17
5. The cause of Kathy Nguyen's
was never properly investigated because the investigators were caught
in the thinking of the moment and didn't look at the "whole
6. The common belief that Bob Stevens
to anthrax as a result of examining the so-called "J-Lo letter" is
nonsense and just more of the thinking of the moment. It doesn't
stand up against facts. Link: 1 - 2
7. The anthrax powder in the
was a "garden variety" powder
and was most likely made in
a commercial lab, a university lab or a hospital lab in Central New
that is still in use. Link: 1Partially
The anthrax mailer
lives and works in Central New Jersey and has not been
because the FBI has not yet obtained sufficient evidence to make an
It is hoped (and possibly expected) that the new science of microbial
will produce the evidence that is lacking for a conviction. Link:
- 2 Partially
wrong. The rest: CONFIRMED.
9. The motivation for the
almost certainly to awaken America to the danger of a bioweapons attack
by Muslim terrorists -
particularly any Muslim terrorists that
might be living or staying in Central New Jersey. Link: 1Partially
wrong. The rest: CONFIRMED.
10. The anthrax mailer
had no direct connection to any source of the Ames strain of anthrax
probably never worked for any government lab. Link: 1Totally
11. The person who
Ames anthrax from the lab where it was being used for medical research
is almost certainly not the same person who refined and mailed the
Link: 1 Totally
12. Al Qaeda was not involved
anthrax attacks in any way. Link: 1 - CONFIRMED
While my analysis was "complete", the case was
closed. New information was still being uncovered by poking
the old facts to see if anything was missed, by examining the facts
new angles, and by debating the known facts with people who have
When new "information discoveries" were made, I
them in the Thoughts & Comments section of
this new main page. When the "new" information is particularly
I also include it in the following section:
"New" Information since Jan. 1, 2005:
Click on the date link to go to the detailed
Learning R's and P's
25, 2005, I laid out in detail my analysis of the way the anthrax
wrote R's and P's. Looking at the examples, it now seems almost
certain that the writer was a child in the first weeks of first
Perhaps more importantly, it seems absolutely clear that learning
took place between the writing of the Brokaw letter and the addressing
of the Brokaw envelope. When the writer wrote R's on the letter
drew the top of the R's as little circles like this:
The drawing of small circles seems to be a
style that the writer figured out, but was not taught.
he addressed the Brokaw envelope, however, he no longer drew
tops of R's as circles, he drew them in a more proper way as
be taught in first grade, like this:
One can actually see that the writer was
to start the loop at the top of the vertical line, since the 3 smaller
R's show he started the loop near but not directly atop the
All forensic handwriting experts agree that the
examples (with the possible exception of the date on the media
are from the same writer. Yet, there is a significant difference
abilities between these two writing samples. One would expect
they would be written only minutes apart, but there
are clear indications that enough time passed between the writing of
Brokaw letter and the addressing of the Brokaw envelope for the writer
to learn the proper way to write R's. Was it
Hours? Days? The text of the letter ("THIS IS NEXT") clearly
the media letter was written on or after 9/11, even though the date on
the letter was apparently added minutes, hours or days later by a
On the New York Post envelope he was still having
hard time getting it right:
This seems to confirm what I wrote in my book
the handwriting, and this information would definitely be included in
The Culprit's First Words
28, 2005, I realized that my book doesn't put enough emphasis on
first words in the letter to the media sent by the anthrax
The first crime is typically the crime that truly defines the nature of
the criminal. The media letters were the first letters sent by
culprit. And here are the first two lines of the anthrax-filled
THIS IS NEXT
TAKE PENACILIN NOW
The full meaning of those words couldn't be more
WEAPONS ATTACK IS COMING NEXT!
PENICILLIN IS A CURE FOR ANTHRAX!
Can there be any other interpretation?
The other three lines in the letter are just
slogans to make it appear that some Muslim terrorist sent the
But would a Muslim terrorist warn America (via letters to the media)
a biological attack was coming next? And would a Muslim terrorist
tell you that there was a cure for what was in the letters?
So, it's never been more clear that the culprit
America that a biological weapons attack was (or could be) coming next,
and he was telling America that people can be protected against the
of such an attack - if they are alert to the danger. If
ignore the danger and are infected, even penicillin may not save you.
While I do point this out in my book, a new look
the first two sentences of the first letter confirms what I
I should have put more emphasis on those two sentences in the book.
"Smoking Gun" Evidence
2005, I completed an analysis of information which came about as a
result of the subpoena and deposition of Virginia Patrick, wife of
Patrick III. The information seems to confirm that the
was telling people that bloodhounds had been used to find "smoking gun"
evidence proving that Dr. Hatfill was a mass murderer, while,
reality, they were telling a false story to cover up the fact
they'd lost their tail of Dr. Hatfill on a trip back from
There is no logical reason for the FBI to have dogs sniff Mrs. Patrick
ten months after the mailing except to see if she'd recently
with Dr. Hatfill. (A hug could easily have put his scent on
It also reminds me that I made a mistake by failing to mention in my
that the FBI impounded the Camaro which Dr. Hatfill had
driven to Louisiana. Impounding the Camaro makes no sense except
that they needed it to help find out where Dr. Hatfill had been during
the period he wasn't being tailed.
Silica vs Polymerized Glass
21, 2006, I reported that Dr. Douglas Beecher, a scientist at the
labs, had released a scientific report
very clearly that it was a "misconception"
that the anthrax spore powders contained additives and/or that
engineering" was required to make the powders. Dr. Beecher also
pointedly suggests that articles printed by The
Washington Post, The Washington
and Science Magazine (among others) "may
misguide research and preparedness efforts and generally detract from
magnitude of hazards posed by simple spore preparations."
This is a significant verification of what I wrote in my book.
2006, it was realized that the silicon and oxygen detected by AFIP
in the Daschle anthrax powder could be trace amounts remaining
coating the wet spores with a surfactant prior to
The purpose and significance of a surfactant is explained in an October
29, 2001, article in New
Previously, beginning on April
28, 2005, it was believed that the silicon and oxygen detected by
in the Daschle anthrax powder could have been in the form of
not in the form of silica as had been previously assumed
just about everyone (including me). It was also realized that
this finding was uncovered by Gary Matsumoto in his article in Science
Magazine, no explanation for the presence of polymerized glass
be given by any recognized bioweapons expert, so Matsumoto found a
with no expertise in bioweapons who was willing to simply make
up an explanation for the polymerized glass which would perpetuate
the conspiracy theory that the powder was from some top secret (and
bioweapons lab. (There are many places in
web site where I state that the silicon and oxygen were "most likely"
result of lab contamination. Surfactant traces would not be "lab
contamination", but I'm not certain that is the "most likely" source of
the silicon and oxygen, either.)
But utilizing a surfactant when drying
is evidently a common practice in microbiology, and it appears to be
known even to most microbiology students. Although the New
article talks only about bioweapons manufacturing, the use of
is definitely not something restricted only to bioweapons facilities.
These findings seem to confirm the
in two ways: (1) It seems to confirm that the anthrax did not have to
from a bioweapons lab, and (2) it seems to confirm that the silicon and
oxygen detected by AFIP was could be trace amounts of a surfactant left
after drying the spores or it
be lab contamination or
It was not something supersophisticated, but something almost
microbiologist could use to create a dry powder of pure spores.
The "Near-Ubiquitous" Ames
2006 - A report from a well-informed source indicates that "The
Ames strain of Bacillus anthracis used in the attacks is distributed
throughout the world, making it difficult
to track down a potential source." On August 7 we learned that
informed source said Ames was "exchanged all over the world", and on
30 we learned another well-informed source said the Ames strain is
We don't know what was learned which changed the official word on this
from saying it was in "limited distribution" to it being
but it appears that the original beliefs were wrong -- and the
beliefs are probably in my book somewhere. However, this also
that the anthrax culprit could have obtained the Ames strain a lot more
easily than previously believed. (After the suicide of Bruce
it was revealed that there were only 16 U.S. labs in possession of the
Ames strain, plus there were others in Canada, Sweden and the United
News stories, however, say that Russia also had a sample.
had Ames with the specific mutant markers that were found in the
Detecting Silicon &
2005, I checked out Ari Fleischer's book "Taking The Heat: The
the Press, and My Years in the White House". It confirmed
that "the anthrax could have been made in a
well-equipped lab by a Ph.D. or a microbiologist" and didn't
to come from some super-sophisticated, top secret government lab.
Fleischer also says he personally contacted AFIP to learn what they had
found in the Daschle anthrax, and he was told that "the
Daschle anthrax contained silicon and oxygen".
tends to confirm that when AFIP used an energy dispersive X-ray
spectrometer to search for anything out of the ordinary in the anthrax,
they only detected those two elements, and they jumped to
when they said they had found silica.
S.P. Velsko on Bioforensics
9, 2005, I discovered that a scientific
paper dated Feb. 15, 2005, by S. P. Velsko appears to confirm that
(1) the anthrax spores in the attacks of 2001 were not coated
silica, and (2) that the media's reportage of such a coating was
and doubted by scientists working with the FBI in the
Ignorance is Not a
25, 2005, I realized that, contrary to what I suggest in my book,
is no dispute between engineers and microbiologists over van
Waals forces and the need to have coatings on the attack anthrax
The dispute is actually between experts who know about spores and
... and "experts" who do not. It's now clear that conspiracy
in the media began with a false premise that the attack spores
coated with silica, even though the FBI and microbiologists and
experts who know about such things indicated otherwise. So, the
found experts who knew about coatings on substances - but who
about spores and used them to "verify" the conspiracy
There is apparently no shortage of "experts" willing to provide to the
media their "scientific opinions" regarding scientific matters totally
outside of their areas of scientific expertise and about which they are
29, 2006, I displayed an e-mail from Science magazine which
that the Gary Matsumoto article in Science magazine was a "News
and not a science article, that it did not involve "original research"
and depended instead on "views of science", and they also seem to
that it was a political article and not a science article,
they felt a retraction would be "censoring" the author.
2006 and April 25, 2006,
I learned that it isn't uncommon to store anthrax spores. On page
45 of my book I suggest that it is. While storing anthrax spores
in powder form may still be uncommon, clearly there are
to store anthrax cultures resulting from tests, and those
(which may often contain spores) appear to be routinely stored in a
to prevent aerosolization of the spores. Therefore, it is no
"most likely" that the anthrax used in the attacks of 2001 were in
bacteria form when stolen. It's still very unlikely that
powders in the letters were used in exactly the same form as stolen,
I now know there are ways of storing anthrax which seem more likely to
be open to theft than frozen bacteria.
Made in the "northeastern
12, 2006, I discussed an NBC report
that the attack anthrax was made using water from a source in the
U.S." It seemed to confirm what is said in my book and on
web site, i.e., that the anthrax was made in Central New Jersey.
But, the facts about Bruce Ivins showed that Maryland could
to be in the "northeastern U.S.", too.
Kathy Nguyen's Exposure
28, 2007, I was informed that the Tom Brokaw letter was taken to
NYC Public Health Laboratory at 455 First Avenue, not to the Health
facility located at 125 Worth St., as I stated in my book. It
nothing else in my analysis.
An FBI "Sting" traps a
On or around December
23, 2007, my analysis showed that the deposition of Daniel S.
may explain how and why the false
information was released to Newsweek
about the bloodhounds getting Dr. Hatfill's scent off of the anthrax
The Microbial Forensics
3, 2008, I analyzed the January 24, 2008, lectures that were given
on the subject of getting the new science of microbial forensics
in court. The slide presentations seem to make it clear that the
FBI is pushing to get microbial forensics accepted so that they can
the anthrax mailer without fear that the evidence will be thrown out of
court and the culprit let free.
Dr. Bruce Ivins
1, 2008, The Los Angeles Times broke the news that the man the FBI
suspected of committing the anthrax attacks of 2001 had committed
The initial media reports included a jumble of irrelevant information
Dr. Ivins' mental state in the last years of his life, but, eventually,
new details about the FBI's
investigation came out, followed by details about Dr.
Ivins' activities at USAMRIID in the days before the anthrax
and it soon became clear that Dr. Bruce Ivins was almost certainly the
Hatfill v Ashcroft et al:
On June 27, 2008, the case was settled. The government paid Dr.
$2.825 million in cash plus an annuity of $150,000 per year for 20
The Settlement Agreement is HERE.
Hatfill v Foster, Vanity
& Readers Digest: A change of venue was granted to move the
case from Alexandria, VA, to New York City and the case was handled
lawsuit was settled on or around February 23, 2007.
My "comment" for March 4, 2007,
Hatfill v The New York
An appeal filed in the Hatfill vs The New York Times lawsuit
in the dismissal being overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals
the 4th circuit on July 29, 2005, and by the
full 4th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals on October 14, 2005. According to
the Docket, on November 8, 2005, the case
"stayed" while The New York Times filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme
Court. That appeal was denied on March 27, 2006. So, the
will proceed in an Alexandria, VA, court. The final pre-trial
occurred on schedule on November 16, 2006.
On October 20, 2006, Judge Liam O'Grady Ordered the New York Times to
3 confidential sources. The Times refused. The
case was dismissed in a Summary
on January 12, 2007. The appeals were heard on March 21, 2008,
the dismissal was upheld by the appeals court on July 14,
The case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and was rejected by the
Supreme Court on Dec. 15, 2008.
Stevens v United States:
The government's motion (filed in July
of 2004) to dismiss the Maureen Stevens
against the government was finally denied on April 18, 2005.
The Palm Beach Post, Judge Hurley
ordered the government to respond to the lawsuit by June 2, 2005.
On June 10, 2005, according to the Docket,
however, some aspect of the case was turned over to a Magistrate Judge
and to mediation. In October of 2008, The
Florida Supreme Court ruled that the wrongful death case can go
in Florida court.
Stevens v The Battelle
Institute et al: Maureen Stevens' lawsuit against The
Memorial Institute is evidently in the discovery phase. The
is available by clicking HERE.
Thoughts and Comments:
Updates to this Site
about what it all means
This is no longer the
of this web site.
To view comments,
December 31, 2008, click
|Updates & Changes: Sunday,
2008, thru Wednesday, December 31, 2008
December 31, 2008 - If
out there who thinks that no one any longer believes that Dr.
was the anthrax mailer, check out the posting on December 30th, 2008 at
7:54 pm by "AnthraxSleuth" on The
Blogger News Network. He writes:
I have facts and evidence, Physical evidence
that Steven Hatfill
is the Anthrax Mailer.
Maybe he's writing a book or starting a web site.
Let's hope it's
nothing crazier than that.
[...] I have facts and more physical evidence that the
FBI, one agent in particular, have fallen all over themselves to not
real culprits. [...]
the truth is coming out, I’m making damn sure of it.
December 30, 2008 - This
Meryl Nass's blog contains a correction to her earlier comments
mutants found in the attack anthrax. The correction also contains
errors, but it is a step in the right direction.
Meanwhile, the long discussion on The
Blogger News Network shows why I like arguing with conspiracy
so much. They sometimes try to argue science. And,
pressed, they will describe the science that they feel supports
One current scientific argument boils down to
The FBI stated that they used four key DNA mutations
to find the
source of the attack anthrax. The source was determined to be the
flask known as RMR-1029, which was controlled by Dr. Bruce Ivins.
The search identified eight
with the key four mutations from the attack anthrax. A total of
1,070 samples from over 15 labs were tested.
The FBI states that RMR-1029 was one of those eight
samples, and RMR-1029 was the "parent" of the attack anthrax and
the "parent" of the other seven samples.
It can undoubtedly be proven via documents and paper
RMR-1029 was the "parent" of the other seven
However, in the discussion, "BugMaster" argues that
it is impossible
to prove that one of the other seven
couldn't be the "parent" of the attack anthrax instead of
The argument is evidently based upon a belief that Bacillus
does not mutate fast enough to allow anyone to distinguish DNA
between RMR-1029 and any sample grown from spores in RMR-1029.
In the roundtable
on August 18, however, Dr. Paul Keim made statements which seem to
suggest that when using the entire DNA, it is now possible to
which batch is the parent and which is the descendant. I pointed
that out to "BugMaster," but she/he claimed that if that is indeed what
Dr. Keim said, then he is WRONG.
Ah! Love it! Love it! Love it! A
scientists that can seemingly be easily resolved by getting more
I'm attempting to do so.
Meanwhile, the discussion has been taken over by a
who posts endless and irrelevant messages which he wants everyone to
And, if they don't, that is proof to him that others don't have all the
information about the case that he has, and they don't care about the
as he sees it. That's why I avoid (whenever possible) arguing
True Believers. But some things he says are interesting.
the statement he made on December 28th, 2008 at 8:08 p.m.
begins this way:
I’ve had a long
heart-to-heart with the
anthrax mailer. He’s convinced me that the US DOJ has problems
are far more difficult to resolve than the embarrassment over ...
That looks like it may have come
from some Book
of Revelations, Chapter 1, Verse 1.
December 29, 2008 - On
mentioned a discussion on The
Blogger News Network where some people were arguing that comments
on Dr. Nass's web site about an unclear statement in a slide
by Dr. Jacques Ravel somehow indicated that the FBI was in error and
the morphologic variations in spore colonies
were not entirely
identical between the NY Post and Leahy letters
Checking with Dr. Ravel, he tells me that the slides
referred to a list
of morphotypes/wild type isolates (a.k.a mutants) that were sequenced.
It didn't refer to the number of mutants in the NY Post and Leahy
nor whether they were identical or not. So, it was just
example of people assuming that any discrepancy found anywhere shows
FBI was wrong, when, in reality, it just shows that people
what they were seeing and didn't bother to find out why things didn't
As a bonus, Dr. Ravel confirmed that the four
identical mutations were
present in each of the anthrax letters and in flask RMR1029.
BTW, if you want to see an extremely lively
the current status of the anthrax investigation, click on that Blogger
News Network link above.
December 28, 2008 -
Although there are
still a few days left in 2008, this seems a good time to summarize
facts for the past year. A chart showing activity for this web
explains a lot:
Clearly, August was an unusual month. It was on
August 1 that
the news broke about Dr. Ivins allegedly being the anthrax
As I recall, there were days during that month when I had over 400
emails in my inbox. I'm still trying to absorb all the new
information that came out that month.
I wrote about 115,000 words of comments during 2008,
far more than
in any previous year. Add in another 14,000 words in the
supplemental sections I wrote, and the total comes to well over the
of words that would be in 2 novels.
Things have quieted down significantly since August,
The conspiracy theorists and True Believers rarely send me emails these
days, although they still discuss their beliefs on public forums such a
Meryl Nass's blog, FreeRepublic.com
and as added comments to articles on The
Blogger News Network and elsewhere.
2009 looks like it should be the wrap-up year.
scientific reports detailing facts about the scientific elements of the
Amerithrax investigation should be published. The promised
hearings into the processes and findings of the Amerithrax
should take place. We may even see a book or two from insiders in
the case. And each of those activities should spur heated
from people with contrary beliefs and opinions.
Personally, I'm looking forward to 2009 very
|Updates & Changes: Sunday,
2008, thru Saturday, December 27, 2008
December 25, 2008 - How
did I spend
my Christmas, you ask? I spent it enjoying myself. What I
most these days - and for most of the past seven years - is arguing
the anthrax attacks of 2001. And things get particularly
when something new is learned or when some complex issue is clarified.
The discussions which greatly clarified for me the
issue of the mutants
in the attack spores took place HERE,
but some of the discussion by "anonymous" was carried over from Dr.
Meryl Nass's web blog, where Dr. Nass recently made this comment:
To make a big deal about 4 morphologic findings
that were present
in the anthrax letters--and then to learn one sample had 3 and the
5, MEANING THEY WERE NOT IDENTICAL--defies understanding.
And "anonymous" commented:
IS FBI simply practicing its own version of Hitler's
Big Lie? As paraphrased
by the OSS: "People will believe a big lie sooner than a little one;
if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe
One sample having 5 and the other 3 must mean
that the first
had all 4 of the morphological varients plus the orginal (for a total
5), while the second had only 2 plus the original (for a total of 3).
Looking at my copy of the roundtable
discussion of August 18, 2008, the facts appear to be as follows:
So one had all four, but the other only 2.
Hey guys, this is FBI science we're talking about here, not real
The FBI invented their own laws of science a long time ago
1. There were "well over a dozen"
mutations or "morphological
varients" in the attack anthrax. That was noticed almost
2. Using scientific procedures which had never
applied to microbial forensics, scientists selected four
of those mutants as key search criteria when they went through the
1,070 samples of the Ames strain the FBI collected from over 15
labs around the world.
3. They found only eight samples from
among the 1,070
which had all four mutants. All eight samples came from just two
labs: USAMRIID and one other (presumably Battelle).
4. None of the other samples contained
3 of the key
mutations. Some contained 1 or 2.
5. DNA testing showed that seven of the eight
were "daughters" of the "mother" spores in the eighth sample, the
flask controlled by Dr. Ivins.
6. The attack spores were also
"daughters" of the mother
spores in the RMR-1029 flask.
The above facts say that the attack anthrax could not
come from any of the other 1,062 sources. And since "daughter"
can presumably only produce "granddaughter" spores, the only
source is RMR-1029.
The information on Dr. Nass's web page needs
clarification, but no
valid interpretation will change the fact that the attack anthrax was
from spores in flask RMR-1029. The seven samples of daughter
spores couldn't produce it, and no other known source had the three
found in the media anthrax, much less the five in the senate anthrax.
Mutations are random, although certain types of
mutations are more
common than others. If a viable mutation occurs early in the
process, there should be many of that mutation in the final
If a viable mutation occurs late in the growing process, there should
very few of that mutation in the final product. The four key
were probably picked because there were many of them in the attack
(but still far less than 1% of the total), and they were specific
which would be easily and reliably identified.
And since mutations are random, the chances of three
matching those in the attack anthrax growing spontanously in
growth is virtually nonexsistant.
We all need to wait for the scientific papers which
will go into
the details. Two quotes from the roundtable discussion seem to make
It is important to
emphasize that the
science used in this case is highly validated and well accepted
the scientific community. The novelty is in the application of these
for forensic microbiology.
One other aspect of this is that we’re trying
to preserve the
peer reviewed scientific publishing process, so we’ve identified a
of papers that will come out of this also, so again, these are multiple
layers of validation. We talked about the various ways that — we had
working groups that advised on the approach, how we develop the
we had many people work on the actual samples themselves and on the
were so many people involved in this that participated we want allow
another layer of validation, which is the peer review process. So this
will be made public. We have more than 10 papers that we have
identified to be published on this. We’re just preserving the ability
do that. If we disclose everything here then we will not be able to
Unfortunately, every day that passes before these
are published is another day when conspiracy theorists can distort or
the known facts in order to dream up a dozen or more new theories.
December 24, 2008
- FWIW, I took the chart of Dr. Ivins' overtime hours in lab B3 that
warrant applications and re-did it to show year 2000 and 2001
instead of as overlapping graphs. Here is the result:
While the chart makes it clear
that Ivins spent
a LOT of time in lab B3 at the time the culprit would have been
the attack anthrax, far far more than at any other time in the
years, the most curious thing the graph shows is that he began working
long hours in lab B3 in August of 2001, the month before
That seems to indicate that
whatever he was
doing, it wasn't entirely connected to the events of 9/11.
But, then again, if he was
worried about a
possible anthrax attack and/or the lack of available anthrax vaccines
the future of his work, there's no reason to believe that those worries
would have suddenly popped into his head on 9/11.
One could conclude that he was experimenting
or practicing in August. The fact that he had no
for what he was doing suggests that whatever it was, it wasn't
he wanted the authorities to know about.
December 22, 2008 - This
NPR's "Morning Edition," they have a story titled "Survey
Reports Scientists 'Suspicious' Of FBI." I can testify to
Many of the scientists with whom I talk are suspicious of the
But that's mainly because I often talk with conspiracy theorists, and
seem to be a large number of conspiracy theorists among
Some even have downright hatreds for the FBI and just about every
in every branch of the government.
Interestingly, the article says:
Only 15 percent of scientists who responded to
the survey had
ever had any professional contact with law enforcement agents.
So, it isn't direct contact with the FBI that causes the
It's what they read in the media or see on TV. The article also
[Michael] Stebbins [the director of biology
policy at the Federation
of American Scientists] is surprised though, by what he sees as
"unhealthy level of paranoia" among scientists. Researchers worried
the FBI would inhibit their ability to conduct research, or would want
to classify their work, read their personal e-mails, or ask them to
the work of their colleagues.
Daniel Cloyd, who runs the FBI's
says misconceptions about law enforcement are widespread.
On the positive side,
"In movies, we tend to run the gamut," he says. "We're
and women who can do no wrong, or we're bumbling fools who can do
right." Neither is accurate, he adds.
the vast majority of scientists seemed open to
FBI under certain circumstances. Just over 90 percent reported that
technical expertise in a specific area was a "good or excellent" reason
to be consulted by the FBI. Eighty percent said helping with an ongoing
investigation would be a "good or excellent" reason to help.
So, one might conclude that scientists are suspicious of
the FBI because
the FBI asks other scientists about scientific matters and not
By nature, scientists tend to be suspicious of anything they haven't
and checked out for themselves.
December 21, 2008 - I've
been so busy
arguing for the past week that I didn't have any time to think about
I'd write for today's comment. I awoke this morning thinking I'd
write about how Internet archivers are recording arguments that in the
past would have purely oral and lost forever, but today they are in a visual
format and are recorded forever. I was particularly
by the ongoing conversations HERE
and HERE which seemed
hit home on one of my main themes: Some people will argue beliefs as if
they were facts and dismiss facts as absurd beliefs - no matter how
evidence there is to support the facts.
Back in 2001 or 2002, when I first heard the
suggestion that a six-year-old
child might have written the anthrax letters, I just dismissed the
It didn't seem logical that anyone would use a child that way. It
seemed too risky. But, as arguments about the handwriting
with some claiming it was disguised and others claiming it was an Arab
who was just learning to write with Roman characters, facts started
up which truly pointed toward a child having written the letters.
I changed from dismissing the idea to saying it was "possible," to
it was "likely," to saying it was "very likely," and finally when some
key evidence appeared, to saying it was "a near certainty."
When the FBI identified Bruce Ivins as the culprit, and it turned out
Bruce Ivins' wife ran a day care center and he had a lot of contact
children of the right age, it was just icing on the cake.
I can't go beyond "a near certainty," since without sworn statements
the writer or the culprit or other solid evidence, there is always the possibility
of another explanation, and I need to keep an open mind for that.
But, some will argue that just shows that I have a "closed mind," since
anyone with an "open mind" would immediately see that the whole idea is
foolish and would dismiss the idea completely without even looking at
But, this morning the argument changed.
Suddenly, the person
I was arguing with seemed to accept the possibility that I might
be right. What happened? The only thing I can see is that I
mentioned that what we were arguing about was not my original
It came from someone else. My web site says I got the idea from
on a news discussion group. Later I learned the idea may
originally come from Brother
Jonathan. Did the fact that it wasn't my idea change
Did that somehow change it from one person's screwball idea to a possibly
valid idea shared by other people?
This morning, there was an email in my inbox from a
official in another country who regularly reads this web site, and he
impressed by the discussion, but he felt there was still the unanswered
question of how the culprit avoided getting the child's fingerprints
over the envelopes. I don't know. I don't know that
can't simply be wiped off a letter. I don't know that a scientist
wouldn't have ways to get rid of fingerprints. I don't know that
the culprit didn't simply show the child how to avoid getting the
"messy" by putting a piece of paper under the hand that was holding the
envelope in place. I remember doing that when I was a
The hand holding the pen wouldn't leave fingerprints if the adult was
hand to make sure it didn't. And there could be other answers as
And I certainly don't know why the culprit
chose to use a
child instead of one of the hundred other methods of disguising
that have been suggested over the years. Maybe he just thought it
was a different way that had never been done before and no one would
it. Maybe he figured they'd assume one of the other routine
was used. Or they'd believe that an actual Muslim terrorist wrote
Last week I also discussed other things with other
people, but as
I write these words a new idea has occurred to me. If Bruce Ivins
was the anthrax mailer, how would he have reacted when he saw on my web
site I was claiming that a child wrote the letters? We know he
at least an occasional visitor to this site. He paid a visit a
days before he committed suicide. And he used a method that
visitors use to get to my site: He typed my name into
It requires fewer key strokes than typing in my web site name or almost
any other search argument. With all the records that are
of what people do on the Internet, I wonder what information is out
about Ivins' searches that hasn't yet been found. And how much
be solidly connected to Ivins?
If more people were thinking of ways to find evidence
Bruce Ivins instead of looking for ways to prove the FBI was wrong
him, I wonder what would turn up. I've been discussing an
with the FBI that might produce a "smoking gun" if proper
are kept by the right people for long periods.
For nearly seven years, the debate was over who did
Now that the culprit has been identified, I'd like to see some debate
ways to confirm it was Ivins. Discussing theories about
the FBI is totally wrong and part of some conspiracy seems much
more a waste of time today than it did before the facts about Ivins
|Updates & Changes: Sunday,
2008, thru Saturday, December 20, 2008
December 17, 2008 - It's
over seven years after the anthrax attacks of 2001, a question that has
never been asked before can still generate a very interesting
In an on-line discussion HERE,
I was asked, “Ed: Do you think that it is likely that the mailer waited
until the FBI was looking at the mail before they mailed the Senator
The person asking the question had a theory that the
to send the Senate anthrax letters after seeing a CNN report on the 8th
of October which mentioned that the FBI was on the case. I
see any reason for that being a factor. Besides, it took at
a week to prepare the letters. How could he get a motive on
8th and mail the letters that same night?
My previous thinking was that the letters were
prompted by reports
in the media that Bob Stevens' infection may have come from natural
sources. But, that was also pushing the time needed to
the anthrax. Those stories came out on the 4th and 5th.
So, I took a look at the headlines for around the
time when the facts
say that Dr. Ivins would have had the minimum time needed to prepare
anthrax - 7 to 10 days prior to the mailing. Suddenly, boom.
There was a headline on page 16 of The
Washington Post on September 29, 2001, that said:
Demand Growing for Anthrax
The article describes how there was a great demand for
the vaccine by
the public, but there were very few stocks of the vaccine around.
The article says:
Fear of Bioterrorism Attack Spurs Requests for
More than 1,000 people in the past two weeks
have tried to
get shots directly from the vaccine's maker, BioPort of Lansing, Mich.
Callers there are being shunted to a recorded message that reflects
doctors everywhere are saying:
I can easily imagine that that article would be very
reading for a scientist whose whole life was built around the creating
of anthrax vaccines! Particularly at a time when there was a
for commercial sales and the program was in jeopardy of being
down! And even more particularly more than ten days after
the first anthrax mailing and there had been absolutely no news about
in the media.
"All the stockpile that currently exists
is owned by the
Department of Defense. At this time there is no opportunity for any
That reality has infuriated some.
I believe The Post's issue for the 29th actually
comes out on the
evening of the 28th. Plus, for an article like that, Dr. Ivins
even have been called - although his name isn't mentioned in the
I began to wonder: What was Dr. Ivins doing on the evening of the
We have a
source that tells us:
Beginning on September
28, Dr. Ivins
worked eight consecutive nights which consisted of the following times
in building 1425 with time spent in Suite B3:
||Time in Building 1425
||Total Time in B3
||7:16 p.m. to 10:59 p.m.
||1 hour 42 minutes
||8:02 p.m. to 11:18 p.m.
||1 hour 20 minutes
||9:53 p.m. to 12:04 a.m.
||1 hour 18 minutes
||9:14 p.m. to 10:43 p.m.
||7:24 p.m. to 9:39 p.m.
||7:25 p.m. to 10:55 p.m.
||2 hours 59 minutes
||6:10 p.m. to 10:12 p.m.
||3 hours 33 minutes
||7:40 p.m. to 12:43 a.m.
||3 hours 42 minutes
I suppose some will argue that he was working hard on
a new vaccine. But, wasn't he working hard on that before?
And how come nothing new came from his sudden hard work on a new
And why didn't he tell FBI investigators that is what he was
Instead, the facts seem to indicate he was working hard to generate
in putting more effort into vaccine development. And one way to
that would be to send the anthrax filled letters to Senators Daschle
December 15, 2008 -
According to The
Associated Press this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected
Dr. Hatfill's appeal in his lawsuit against the New York Times. I
think that ends the last of Dr. Hatfill's lawsuits. The court
that Dr. Hatfill was a celebrity at the time of the articles and would
therefore have to prove actual malice, which the court felt he hadn't
More details HERE
December 14, 2008 -
While there was
absolutely nothing new about the Amerithrax investigation in the main
media last week, it was a week of many discussions of the subject,
the lengthy ones on-line HERE
and HERE. Even
I'm just arguing with the same people I've been arguing with for seven
years, sometimes bits of new and worthwhile information come to the
Or new questions are asked.
In one conversation, it occurred to me that a
critical factor in
making the attack anthrax would have been speed. The
would almost certainly have made the powders using the fastest
he could use. That poses a basic question: Does Bacillus
grow fastest in a fermenter, in shaking flasks, in solid medium on
or some other way? I think I know the answer, but I'm trying to
it. The answer might also say something about the source of the
found in the spores.
In another conversation, or maybe it was the same
one, a scientist
mentioned a bizarre interpretation of what he'd read in the news.
He seemed to be saying that he and some other scientists were sitting
chuckling to themselves while awaiting the FBI's publication of a
paper where the FBI would try to argue that the rate of mutant
in Bacillus anthracis can be used to precisely determine the
that a spore was made. It's a crazy idea, since
rate and mutation rates are easily slowed down or speeded up by
the environment. Plus, mutation rates are only averages,
one per billion replications. Plus, many mutations are not
and the mutant does not reproduce. But then I realized that the
mistakenly believed that FBI scientists were trying to use such
a ridiculous method, and he and other scientists were just waiting
for the FBI scientists to publish their findings so they could tear
In another part of the discussions, an interesting
question was brought
up: Should we all stop discussing Adolph Hitler? After all,
committed suicide before he could be tried for his crimes. And
everyone innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?
In an email conversation, I learned that it is only
in the movies
where scientists are absolute masters of precise wording. I had
use very precise questions to make absolutely certain that a scientist
who repeatedly uses "on" when he really means "in" really meant
It would be funny if it wasn't so frustrating.
Clearly, it is also only in the movies where
insist on discussing facts instead of beliefs. Trying to discuss
facts with some scientists last week just resulted in them leaving the
conversation. They would only discuss beliefs.
Lastly, in the on-line discussions, it was again
those who think that Bruce Ivins is innocent may all agree that the FBI
is wrong, but each has his own personal theory about who sent the
letters. And their theories are based entirely on
not facts. While there is a clear distinction between the
True Believers and conspiracy theorists think, if the only way a True
can justify his belief that the FBI is wrong about Bruce Ivins is to
up a conspiracy by the government to cover up crimes by al Qaeda, then
so be it. Try to prove it isn't possible.
Fascinating stuff, but when you argue with the same
people year after
year, they soon learn how to end a conversation when it's clear they
making any progress. Most just disappear. But one
endlessly reminds me of Matthew Harrison Brady, the True Believer role
played by Frederick March in the movie "Inherit
The Wind." When Brady found that arguments based upon his
were in a losing fight, he simply began reciting (or preaching)
from his gospel. The Internet equivalent is to start cutting and
pasting endless irrelevant material, until, as in the movie, everyone
gets up and leaves. It turns what could be a very good and
discussion into something mind-numblingly tiresome and
|Updates & Changes: Sunday,
2008, thru Saturday, December 13, 2008
December 12, 2008 -
While a debate rages HERE
about whether or not the Bush administration was framing Dr. Ivins in
to cover up for al Qaeda (!!!!), and another debate rages HERE
about whether the FBI has any real evidence against Dr. Ivins or not,
notified me about a brief radio segment from the National
Academy of Engineering where the questions about the silicon found
in the anthrax spores are raised once again. The segment raises
questions than it answers and seems to take things out of
I'll try to contact the people who were interviewed to see what they
said and meant.
December 11, 2008 - A
Blogger News Network
post titled "Leading
of the Anthrax Mailings Case" generated some comments which have
me to think a bit about the handwriting on the anthrax letters.
For years I've been stating that the facts seem to
make it a near
certainty that a child of about 6 did the actual writing on the
letters (except, perhaps, the date on the media letter) and the anthrax
envelopes. The "person of interest" I had in New Jersey didn't
any access to children, as far as I knew. But, facts are
So, either he had some access I didn't know about, or the handwriting
evidence that the scientist in New Jersey was innocent.
The situation with Bruce Ivins is very
wife ran a daycare center in their home. Daycare centers mainly
care of pre-schoolers younger than 5 or 6, but they also
take care of older children for short periods before
and after school when their parents have to work and the children
still too young to be at home alone, e.g., kindergarteners and first
- children who are 5 or 6.
In addition, there are reports that Ivins sometimes
in a "humble
little school auditorium" and that his eulogy praised him for "His
Devotion to Children." So, if a child of about 6 did write
letters and address the envelopes, it appears Dr. Ivins would
have had access to children of that age.
None of this conclusively proves anything, of
when people say they find it "impossible to believe" that the FBI
persuasively rule out the other 99 (or perhaps as many as 299)
who had access to the virulent strain of anthrax from the flask Ivins
or they find it "impossible to believe" that anyone would use a child
write the anthrax letters, they are saying the facts have no meaning to
them because the facts are "impossible to believe." That makes me
When someone finds something is "impossible to
believe" in spite
of what the facts say, does that say something about the facts or about
the person? Or both?
If both, and, if many people find using a child to
letters "impossible to believe," would presenting such evidence to a
do more harm than good? Could any evidence be good enough
if many people would always find the evidence "impossible to
Testimony might work. But, would a jury believe the testimony of
a 13 year old recalling what he says he believes he did
he was 6? Or might that, too, be "impossible to believe?"
December 7, 2008 -
Because the anthrax
murder case has been solved, I've been mulling over creating a new
page for this web site, which would be implemented on January 1,
The whodunnit mystery is over. The only real question remaining
Can anything convince the conspiracy theorists and True
that the case is solved?
Here the facts of the case against Dr. Bruce Ivins,
as I see them:
1. He was in charge of the RMR-1029
the "mother" spores which produced the attack anthrax "daughter" spores.
There may also be other facts pointing to Dr. Ivins
which have not yet
been disclosed by the FBI. The case has not been officially
And it is known that many scientific reports with details of the
investigation are being written, are going through the peer-review
and/or are awaiting a publication date in scientific journals.
2. He had worked with Bacillus anthracis
for over 20
years and had all the necessary expertise and
equipment to prepare the spores in the anthrax letters.
3. He accessed the locked room where the
RMR-1029 flask of
spores was stored at the times the attack anthrax would have been
4. He worked alone
in his lab for long hours at night and on weekends during the time the
attack anthrax would have been prepared.
5. He had no scientific reason or verifiable
working those hours or at those times.
6. He had multiple
for sending the anthrax letters.
7. He tried various ways to mislead
investigators when they started to suspect him.
8. He had no alibi
either of the times when he could have driven to New Jersey to mail the
9. He was known to drive long distances and
to use various
methods to mail letters and packages so they could not be traced back
10. He had multiple connections to the New
Jersey area where
the anthrax letters were mailed.
11. He had serious
which appear to include murderous impulses.
12. The pre-stamped envelopes which were used
in the attacks
had print defects, and one of the
offices which sold the envelopes with those print defects was a post
which Dr. Ivins used.
13. His wife ran a day care center at the
time of the attacks,
and the facts indicate that a child of about 6 was used to do the
writing on the anthrax letters.
14. Investigations found no evidence that
than Dr. Ivins sent the letters.
15. There is no
that Dr. Ivins could not possibly have sent the anthrax letters.
Meanwhile, those who cannot accept the FBI's findings
use every tactic they can to cast doubt upon the FBI's findings.
They have no proof of Dr. Ivins'
so all they can do is try to make it appear that, if there is any
doubt - reasonable or not - about Dr. Ivins' guilt, then
he must be innocent. After all, if Bruce Ivins is guilty
the evidence clearly indicates, then the conspiracy theorists and True
Believers must be wrong in what
are trying to get people to believe. And they can never
And, because they cannot accept it, for years to come
there may be
an ongoing need to disprove the myths and nonsense being spread by the
conspiracy theorists and True Believers.
An alternative idea for the future of this web site
was to continue
with the evaluation of where I was right and where I was wrong in my
But that seems of limited value. When a case or project or
is complete, there can be great value in looking back at all
missteps and wrong paths that were taken, so that lessons can be
which might help make future cases, projects or investigations go more
smoothly. But only investigations which are complete in about 48
hours tend to be similar to other investigations. Investigations
which go on for years are usually different from all prior
and that is one key reason they go on for years.
The facts now say that the FBI had "persons of
interest" in November
and December of 2001, but their investigations could not find solid
that any of them were the anthrax mailer. In fact, that's
what they repeatedly old us: They had a list of 12 to 20 "persons of
with names being added and removed as facts were collected, but none
be solidly proven to be responsible for the attacks.
Prior to Bruce Ivins' suicide, the facts indicated to
me that the
FBI knew as early as November or December of 2001 who had sent the
letters, but they just couldn't prove it. And they were working
the new science of "microbial forensics" in hopes that the would be
to use that science to prove who sent the letters.
I was right about what they hoped to get from
But I was wrong in believing that it would prove some already known
suspect to be guilty.
The facts now indicate that they had no
viable suspects for
several years after the attacks, as the science of microbial forensics
was being validated. It was during that time that Dr.
to be the focus of the FBI's attention as a result of "tips" from
and pressures from the media, politicians and the public. With no
true viable suspects, it's quite possible that even some FBI agents
that Dr. Hatfill might be the anthrax mailer. After all, respected
scientists were pointing at him.
The first item of microbial forensic evidence
they were hoping
to use to narrow down the search for the killer -- the "silicon
-- proved to be of little or no value. My thinking was that it
have come from the glass container used to grow the
I thought they might be able to trace the "polymerized glass" back to a
manufacturer and then to a specific lab. But, the silicon
turned out to be just silicon that was in the nutrients or water used
grow the bacteria. The silicon got into the spores the same way
gets into a human body if you eat raisins, or zinc gets into a human
if you eat peanuts. It comes from what you eat or drink.
That might have been proof of something if it could
have been shown
that no one else working with anthrax used nutrients or water or food
with that form of silicon. But, no one could show that.
the crime happened years ago, and criminals do not keep accurate
of every detail of their crimes.
The same with the Bacillus subtilis bacteria
found in the
media letters. They might examine ten thousand samples from a
different labs today, but what would those samples prove about what was
happening in September and October of 2001?
Then, in late 2003 or early 2004, came the
scientist at Ft. Detrick noticed that there were viable mutants
of the Ames strain bacteria in the attack anthrax. And those
appeared in only a few of the many Ames samples collected from labs
Eventually, the investigation found that the lengthy
which created the spores in the RMR-1029 flask had produced those
bacteria. And of the 1,072 samples of the Ames strain that were
from 16 or more labs, the key mutants found in the attack anthrax only
showed up in 8 other samples. Those 8 samples came from only 2
And one of those 2 sources was Ft. Detrick. And it could be shown
that the bacteria in the 7 of the 8 samples and the anthrax letters
were all "daughter" bacteria grown from the source of the 8th sample:
"mother" spores in the RMR-1029 flask controlled by Dr. Bruce
That flask was the "smoking gun."
True, there were others who had access to the
But it is standard police work to check out and eliminate
from a list of "possible suspects." It's a routine matter
of checking out alibis (opportunity), of checking out capabilities
and of looking for possible motives. It took years
check out the hundreds of people who might have had access to
And when all but one of those "possibles" were eliminated as suspects
with all the others whose names had come up in the past years),
the investigators were left with only one
viable suspect: Dr. Bruce Ivins. And, as seen in the 15 facts
above, there is an abundance of circumstantial evidence that
Ivins was indeed the one and only anthrax mailer.
So, instead of looking for facts about who committed
the crime, which
we now have, it appears the future will be mostly about disproving the junk
science that conspiracy theorists will continue to use to argue
the case is not solved. The True Believers will continue
claim that anyone who disagrees with them is "closed minded," but
already been doing that for seven years, so nothing is different there.
Hopefully, in 2009 there will be hearings and
the Amerithrax findings which will help clarify everything - as will
the scientific reports that are in the works. None of it will
the minds of True Believers and determined conspiracy theorists, of
But, like what happened with those who insist that the moon landings
some vast government hoax, in time their arguments will almost
be viewed as they should be viewed: The arguments from the
and updates are also available.
for year 2008.
for year 2007.
for year 2006.
for year 2005.
for year 2004.
years 2001, 2002 and 2003.
- Timeline of the 2001 Anthrax Attacks
Edited version of the
Hatfill v Ashcroft et al lawsuit Court Docket
Edited version of the
Hatfill v Foster/Vanity Fair/Readers Digest Court Docket
Edited version of the
Hatfill v The New York Times Court Docket
Edited version of the Maureen Stevens vs
The United States lawsuit Court Docket
Edited version of the Maureen Stevens vs
Battelle Memorial, et al lawsuit Court Docket
view pre-2005 references.
Washington Post - Jan. 12, 2005 - "Search
for Banned Arms In Iraq Ended Last Month"
CNN - Feb. 1, 2005 - "Lone wolves -
Solitary threats harder to hunt"
Livermore Labs - Feb. 15, 2005 - "Physical and Chemical Analytical
A key component of Bioforensics" or HERE.
Associated Press - Feb 16, 2005 -
Enquirer moving headquarters from Florida to New York City"
Associated Press - Feb 20, 2005 -
Manual Takes Page From Current Events"
ABC News - Feb. 24, 2005 - "Anthrax
Attacks Left a Lingering Mistrust"
Washington Post - Mar. 1, 2005 - "Scientists
Object to NIH's Bioterror Focus"
The New York Times - Mar. 1, 2005 -
"U.S. Germ-Research Policy Is Protested by 758 Scientists"
Associated Press - Mar. 1, 2005 -
U.S. Prepared to Fight Anthrax"
ABC News - Mar. 9, 2005 - "Secret FBI
Report Questions Al Qaeda Capabilities"
The Daily Mirror - Mar. 10, 2005 -
"Al-Qaeda ..Have We All Lost The Plot?
1010WINS - Mar. 11, 2005 - "NJ Post
Office to Reopen After Anthrax Cleanup"
Associated Press - Mar. 12, 2005 - "
Postal facility at center of anthrax attacks is ready to reopen"
Newsday - Mar. 14, 2005 - "Post office
opens more than 3 years after anthrax mailings"
Washington Post - Mar. 15, 2005 - "Mail
Facilities Remain Closed After Alerts"
Associated Press - Mar. 15, 2005 -
Detected at Two Defense Mailrooms"
Washington Post - Mar. 15, 2005 - "Initial
Pentagon Test Is Positive for Anthrax"
The New York Times - Mar. 15, 2005
- "Washington Awaits Results of 2 Anthrax Tests"
Reuters - Mar. 15, 2005 - "US stocks fall on anthrax worries" (X)
Fox News Channel - Mar. 15, 2005 -
"Samples Test Positive for Anthrax"
www.wired.com - Mar. 15, 2005 -
CSIs Target Germs"
New Scientist - Mar. 16, 2005 - "US
anthrax scare blamed on sample mix-up"
The Los Angeles Times - Mar. 16, 2005
- "After 2-Day Scare, Tests Show No Anthrax at Mail Facilities"
The New York Times - Mar. 16, 2005
- "Anthrax Scare Is Attributed to a Testing Error"
Washington Post - Mar. 16, 2005 - "New
Tests For Anthrax Negative"
Washington Post - Mar. 16, 2005 - "Anthrax
Alarm Uncovers Response Flaws"
The Chicago Tribune - Mar. 17, 2005
- "Chertoff vows accuracy in wake of anthrax scare"
The Washington Times - Mar. 17,
2005 - "Anthrax deaths remain a mystery"
Newsday - Mar. 17, 2005 - "The 2001
anthrax mystery lingers"
Minneapolis Star-Tribune - Mar. 18,
2005 - "Cold case: The 2001 anthrax killings remain unsolved"
UPI - Mar. 18, 2005 - "Anthrax alert
at Bolling Air Force Base"
The Hartford Courant - Mar. 20,
2005 - "Anthrax scare highlights problems similar to those in 2001"
UPI - Mar. 21, 2005 - "Two labs
The Richmond Times-Dispatch - Mar.
22, 2005 - "Anthrax matches 2001 strain"
The Sun-Sentinel - Mar. 24, 2005 -
"Content in Boca's AMI building set for anthrax decontamination"
The Palm Beach Post - Mar. 24, 2005
- "Photos set for anthrax cleanup"
Fox News - Mar. 25, 2005 - "Homeland
Security to Launch Anthrax Review"
Associated Press - Mar. 27, 2005 -
Photo Collection Part Of Anthrax Cleanup"
Washington Post - Mar. 27, 2005 - "Biohazard
Procedures To Change"
The Wellsville Daily Reporter - Mar.
27, 2005 - "Berry speaks out; Trying to get custody of son, life
after FBI anthrax raids in Wellsville, New Jersey"
The Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette - Mar.
28, 2005 - "Pentagon reshapes anthrax response"
The Washington Times (AP) - Mar. 29, 2005
- "Anthrax dumped near Saddam palace"
Medical News Today - Mar. 31, 2005
- "Scientists seek answers on what activates deadly anthrax spores"
Associated Press - Apr. 4, 2005 -
Found Too Slow on Anthrax Alarm"
Columbia News Service - Apr. 5, 2005
- "Years later, anthrax attack remains a mystery"
The Richmond Times-Dispatch - Apr.
5, 2005 - "Officials fault Pentagon after anthrax scare"
Washington Post - Apr. 5, 2005 - "Bioterror
Plans Inadequate, GAO Says"
Washington Post - Apr. 6, 2005 - "Errors
Cited in Anthrax Scare"
The Sun-Sentinel - Apr. 14, 2005 -
"Fumigation of photos begins at anthrax-infected Boca building"
The Sun-Sentinel - Apr. 17, 2005 -
"Future of AMI office debated"
The Buffalo News - Apr. 18, 2005 -
"Doctor in anthrax case is left with broken pieces of a life"
The Los Angeles Times - Apr. 22, 2005
- "Ex-Army Scientist Can Interview Officials"
Washington Post - Apr. 23,
2005 - "U.S. Yields In Anthrax Lawsuit Standoff"
The New York Times - Apr. 23, 2005
- "Ashcroft Must Answer In Anthrax Suspect's Suit"
The Palm Beach Post - May 14, 2005
- "Lawsuits could shed light on anthrax probe"
The Palm Beach Post - May 15, 2005
- "AMI employee who contracted anthrax ready to go back to old building"
The New York Times - May 21, 2005 -
"Qaeda Letters Are Said to Show Pre-9/11 Anthrax Plans"
Forbes - June 6, 2005 - "Spore Wars"
Palm Beach Post (Editorial) - May
22, 2005 - "Stay on anthrax trail"
Associated Press - May 24, 2005 -
lawyer seeks to revive libel claim"
FindLaw.com (Editorial) - May 26,
2005 - "Why Police and the FBI Should Be Wary to Use "Person of
Associated Press - May 31, 2005 - "
Will Deport al-Qaida Suspect"
AAP - June 1, 2005 - "Biological agent
a bacillus: Howard"
The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) - June
2, 2005 - "Poison letter: innocence lost"
The Courier-Mail - June 2, 2005 -
"Terror shame over bio attack"
The Australian - June 2, 2005 - "
'Cowardly' attack on embassy"
Australian Broadcasting Corp. - June
2, 2005 - "Indonesian police join embassy threat probe"
Seven News - June 2, 2005 - "Embassy
substance not anthrax: police"
The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) - June
3, 2005 - "Racist rants and a murderous threat"
The Los Angeles Times - June 2, 2005
- "Disgust and Admiration at FBI"
The Sydney Morning Herald - June 4,
2005 - "All talc, no action"
The Sydney Morning Herald - June 4,
2005 - "Political class pushes the envelope"
The Age (Australia) - June 5, 2005
- "Terrorism threats in the post"
The New York Times - June 7, 2005 -
"After a Shower of Anthrax, an Illness and a Mystery"
The Sun-Sentinel - June 10, 2005 -
"Expired contract stops anthrax cleanup of AMI building in Boca"
The Ft. Detrick Standard - June 23,
2005 - "USAMRIID ready for 'new era in biodefense'"
Memorandum by Steven Hatfill - Filed June
27, 2005 - Includes a Declaration by Virginia Patrick
Memorandum by the US DOJ - Filed June 28,
2005 - A response to Dr. Hatfill's Memorandum
The Wall Street Journal - July 11, 2005
- "U.S. Struggles for Drugs to Counter Biological Threats"
Washington Post (Editorial)
- July 12, 2005 - "The Overlooked Attack"
Associated Press - July 28, 2005 -
Court Reinstates Hatfill's Libel Suit"
Reuters - July 28, 2005 - "Appeals court reinstates anthrax libel
4th Court of Appeals - July 28, 2005
- Court Decision Order
The New York Times - July 29, 2005
- "Appeal Restores Libel Case Against Times"
Washington Post - July 29,
2005 - "Court Reinstates Anthrax Defamation Suit Against N.Y. Times"
10NBC (Rochester, NY) - Aug.
4, 2005 - "I-Team 10 follow up: Anthrax investigation"
The Times Herald - Aug. 5, 2005 -
" Friend says FBI ceased probe of Wellsville doctor"
The Times of London - Aug. 9, 2005
- "Saddam's germ war plot is traced back to one Oxford cow"
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
(ABC) - Aug. 10, 2005 - "Iraq's anthrax source traced back to Britain"
The Boston Phoenix - Aug. 12, 2005
- "Journalism’s next big battle"
Associated Press - Aug. 17, 2005 -
of cattle dead; anthrax leaves ranchers scrambling"
Washington Post - Sept. 16,
2005 - "Little Progress In FBI Probe of Anthrax Attacks"
The New York Times - Sept. 17, 2005
- "In 4-Year Anthrax Hunt, F.B.I. Finds Itself Stymied, and Sued"
The Washington Post - Sept. 17,
2005 - "Judge Rejects 2 Claims in Hatfill's Lawsuit"
Associated Press - Sept. 18, 2005 - "Two
claims rejected in anthrax lawsuit"
The Trentonian - Sept. 19, 2005 -
"Mystery of the spores"
Washington Post (Editorial)
- Sept. 22, 2005 - "The Anthrax Metaphor"
The Palm Beach Post - Sept. 22, 2005
- "Photographer sues AMI over images in anthrax-tainted site"
The Sun-Sentinel - Sept. 23, 2005
- "Photographer sues tabloid publisher over unreturned images from
Associated Press - Sept. 23, 2005 -
panel drums up more Sept. 11 conspiracy theories"
The Times of London - Sept. 24, 2005
- "Anthrax terrorists outfox the FBI"
New Scientist - Sept. 24, 2005 - "US
army plans to bulk-buy anthrax"
The Albuquerque Tribune - Sept. 26,
2005 - "N.M. labs help national center create plan to fight
Associated Press - Sept. 27, 2005 - "Labs
help against bioterrorism"
Washington Post (Michael Mason
letter to editor) - Sept. 29, 2005 - "The FBI Is Still on the Anthrax
Fort Detrick Standard - Sept. 29,
2005 - "Lab sweet Lab"
USA Today (AP) - Sept. 30, 2005 - "A
new class of evidence for the courtroom"
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review - Oct. 3,
2005 - "Doctor out of work since anthrax probe"
CBS News - Oct. 5, 2005 - "Anthrax
Newsday (AP) - Oct. 12, 2005 - "AP
FBI 'book still open' on Yale bombing, anthrax case"
The Toledo Blade - Oct. 14, 2005 -
"Toledo postal center installs biohazard-detection system"
The Lima News - Oct. 15, 2005 -
Service has new anthrax watchdog"
The Boston Globe (commentary) - Oct.
18, 2005 - "Wanted, dead or alive: Where's bin Laden now?"
San Diego Union Tribune (AP) - Oct. 18,
2005 - "Appeals court allows scientist to pursue libel lawsuit about
against NY Times "
The New York Times - Oct. 19, 2005
- "Court Rebuffs The Times Co. Over Lawsuit"
The Richmond Times-Dispatch - Oct.
19, 2005 - "Libel suit against Times in anthrax case to proceed"
The Daily Record - Oct. 20, 2005 -
"Times may end challenges to Hatfill’s day in court"
Sandia Labs - Oct. 25, 2005 - "Sandia
researchers determine that common anthrax sampling methods need
Newsday (AP) - Oct. 27, 2005 -
Postal workers seek to revive lawsuits over anthrax"
NPR.org - Oct. 28, 2005 - "I. Lewis
Libby: The Plight of a Disciplined Risk-Taker"
Seattle Post-Intelligencer (AP) -
Oct. 29, 2005 - "Some experts scoff at terror WMD threat"
The Mainichi Daily News - Oct. 30,
2005 - "In a world full of microbes, will billions of dollars build
The Palm Beach Post - Nov. 5, 2005
- "Anthrax victim's widow breaks four-year silence"
The Sun-Sentinel - Nov. 5, 2005 -
"Anthrax victim's widow frustrated with 'pattern of delay'"
Mirror.co.uk - Nov. 8, 2005 - "Anthrax
New York Law Journal - Nov. 8, 2005
- "Lawsuit Goes Forward in Anthrax Mailing Case"
The Christian Science Monitor
- Nov. 10, 2005 - "Anthrax whodunit: Is it a cold case file?"
Tooele Transcript-Bulletin - Nov.
11, 2005 - " Area 51, aliens and anthrax? Dugway boss dismisses rumors"
- Nov. 16, 2005 - "Anthrax Revisited - Too Many Coincidences"
The Baltimore Sun - Nov. 18, 2005
- "Hospital sued by family of anthrax victim"
The Baltimore Sun (AP) - Nov. 21,
2005 - "U.S judge sends anthrax suit back to state court"
Press Release - Nov. 28, 2005 -
Millions of Celebrity Photos on File"
The New York Sun - Nov. 29, 2005 -
"Giuliani Firm Anthrax Work Ends in a Feud"
The Sun-Sentinel - Nov. 30, 2005 -
"Anthrax cleanup starts again on Boca Raton office building"
Sidney (Montana) Herald - Dec. 7,
2005 - "Local veterinarian discusses anthrax threat during 2005 Bovine
Daily Press - Dec. 9, 2005 - "How
a company cashed in on anthrax"
The Daily Targum - Dec. 12, 2005 -
"Foreign students face lab limits"
The Wall Street Journal - Dec. 28, 2005
- "A Building Boom for Labs"
The Colorado Springs Gazette - Jan. 1,
2006 - "Detection program for anthrax criticized"
The New Yorker - Jan. 9, 2006 - Jan.
9, 2006 - "Why are the courts leaning on journalists?"
FoxNews.com (AP) - Jan. 31, 2006 -
"Journos Want Supreme Court To Block Secret Sources Order"
American Journalism Review - Feb.
1, 2006 - " Dilemma of Interest"
Newsday.com (AP) - Feb. 6, 2006 -
trial jury questionnaire"
ABC News (AP) - Feb. 7, 2006 - "Brentwood
Anthrax Survivors Take Case to High Court"
Front Page Magazine - Feb. 8, 2006
- "Saddam's WMD's: The Syrian Connection"
The Boston Globe - Feb. 10, 2006
- "BU's biolab and the law"
Cybercast News Service - Feb. 15,
2006 - "Secret Saddam WMD Tapes Subject of ABC Nightline Special"
ABC News - Feb. 15, 2006 - "EXCLUSIVE:
The Secret Tapes -- Inside Saddam's Palace"
TVC News - Feb. 16, 2006 - "ABC
Tapes Translation Said to be Wrong"
Cybercast News Service - Feb. 17,
2006 - "Interpreter of 'Saddam Tapes' Disagrees With ABC's 'Take' on
PR Newswire - Feb. 19, 2006 - "Cheney
Believed He, His Family and Staff May Have Been Exposed in an Anthrax
After 9/11; Was False Alarm But Story Kept Quiet"
The National Review - Feb. 20, 2006
- “He Shall Direct Thy Paths to the Weapons of Mass Destruction.”
Newsweek - Feb. 27, 2006
- "The Shot Heard Round the World"
Reuters - Feb. 22, 2006 - "New York man accidentally poisoned by
CNN - Feb. 22, 2006 - " New York man
falls ill with anthrax symptoms"
Associated Press - Feb. 22, 2006 - "NYC
Man in Pa. Said Infected With Anthrax"
The New York Times - Feb. 22, 2006
- "New York Anthrax Case Believed to Be Accidental"
Newsday (AP) - Feb. 22, 2006 - "NYC
man contracts anthrax"
The New York Daily News - Feb. 22,
2006 - "Call for calm as anthrax is back"
Newsday.com - Feb. 23, 2006 -
The New York Times - Feb. 23, 2006
- "Officials Try to Trace the Journey of a Disease"
Associated Press - Feb. 23, 2006 -
at Mansfield University learn of anthrax case"
NY1 News - Feb. 23, 2006 - "Anthrax
Investigation Finds No Other Exposures"
Newsday.com - Feb. 23, 2006 - "Man
recovering after contracting inhalation anthrax"
The New York Times - Feb 23, 2006 -
"A Dancer Apparently Felled by the Animal Skins on Drums"
The New York Times - Feb. 23, 2006
- "Health Officials Take Samples in Anthrax Case"
Newsday - Feb. 24, 2006 - "Three
more treated in anthrax case"
The New York Times - Feb. 24, 2006
- "Drum Maker in Brooklyn Has No Fear of Anthrax"
The New York Times - Feb. 24, 2006
- "Where Tracking Anthrax Begins With the Honor System"
The New York Daily News - Feb. 24,
2006 - "Anthrax list adds 3"
The New York Daily News - Feb. 24,
2006 - "Experts baffled by case"
Newsday (AP) - Feb. 24, 2006 -
Anthrax patient's life in danger"
Village Voice - Feb. 24, 2006 -
City Hunts Hides"
The New York Times - Feb. 25, 2006
- "Anthrax Traces Found at 3 Sites as Victim Worsens"
The New York Times - Feb. 26, 2006
- "City Officials Await Anthrax Tests Results"
The Journal News - Feb. 26, 2006
- "Officials say no anthrax threat after drum maker's visit to Hastings"
The New York Times - Feb. 27, 2006
- "An Apartment in Brooklyn Is Cleared in Anthrax Test"
Washington Post - Feb. 27,
2006 - "Fort Detrick Neighbors Jittery Over Expansion"
The Journal News - Feb. 28, 2006
- "Doctors: Hastings children face no anthrax risk"
CIDRAP News - Feb. 28, 2006 - "Tests
back hides as anthrax source in New York case"
WNYC News - Feb. 28, 2006 - "Anthrax
Case Tests Public Health Preparedness"
CommunityDispatch.com - Feb. 28,
2006 - "Questions and Answers: Anthrax and Animal Hides"
The New York Times - Mar. 1, 2006 -
"Tenants Irked as Anthrax Keeps a Brooklyn Warehouse Closed"
The Amsterdam News - Mar. 1, 2006
- "Concern and doubt: New York community uneasy over Anthrax case"
The Staten Island Advance - Mar.
2, 2006 - "Anthrax fears shake Island school"
Sun-Sentinel.com - Mar. 2, 2006 -
"Anthrax fears rain on Queens parade tradition"
The Villager - Mar. 1-7, 2006 -
drums up scare, as Village man is stricken"
The New York Times - Mar. 3, 2006 -
"Federal Workers Decontaminate Anthrax Victim's Home"
NY1 News - Mar. 6, 2006 - "Anthrax
Cleanup Continues Inside Brooklyn Warehouse"
WCBS-TV (AP) - Mar. 6, 2006 -
Victim's Condition Improves"
NY1 News - Mar. 7, 2006 - "Manhattan
Man's Apartment Still Has Traces Of Anthrax"
ABC (Australia) - Mar. 8, 2006 -
"Australia reports first human anthrax infection since 1998"
The Villager - Mar. 10, 2006 -
service takes on new meaning in the Village"
NY1 News - Mar. 10, 2006 - "Manhattan
Man Who Contracted Anthrax Suffers Health Setback"
The New York Times - Mar. 11, 2006
- "Anthrax Patient's Condition Slips to Serious"
Newsday.com - Mar. 11, 2006 -
microbiologist criticizes security measures at U.S. labs"
The Star-Ledger - Mar. 11, 2006 -
"Warning raised on lax biolab controls"
NY1 News - Mar. 13, 2006 - "Manhattan
Man With Anthrax Said To Be Improving"
Technology Review - Mar.-Apr., 2006
- "The Loss of Biological Innocence"
Technology Review - Mar. 13-15, 2006
- "The Knowledge - Part 1, Part 2,
The New York Daily News - Mar. 21,
2006 - "Anthrax victim improving in hosp"
Sayre Morning Times - Mar. 22, 2006
- "Man with anthrax could be released soon"
The New York Times - Mar. 23, 2006
- "Back on His Feet, Anthrax Patient Plans to Dance Again"
Newsday (AP) - Mar. 23, 2006 -
victim released from Pa. hospital, thanks doctors"
Sayre Morning Times - Mar. 23, 2006
- "Anthrax patient says he will dance again"
WABC News - Mar. 23, 2006 - "Anthrax
victim released from hospital"
The (Towanda, PA) Daily Review -
Mar. 23, 2006 - "Anthrax victim awaits release from Robert Packer
The New York Post - Mar. 23, 2006
- " A Miracle Dance By Anthrax Survivor"
The Wall Street Journal - Mar. 23, 2006
- "Blogging Biochemist Tracks Bird Flu, But Scientists Remain Skeptical"
The (Towanda, PA) Daily Review -
Mar. 24, 2006 - " Sayre Anthrax patient released"
The Associated Press - Mar. 27, 2006
"Justices: Suit Against Times Can Proceed"
- Mar. 27, 2006 - "Top court won't review anthrax libel ruling" (X)
Bloomberg.com - Mar. 27, 2006 - "New
York Times Loses U.S. High Court Bid to Stop Hatfill Suit"
Reporters Committee - Mar. 27, 2006
- "High court refuses to stop anthrax libel suit"
The New York Times - Mar. 28, 2006
- "Court Rebuffs Times on Libel Suit Appeal"
NewsDay (AP) - Mar. 29, 2006 -
victim returns to New York; supporters question cleanup"
The Hartford Courant - Apr. 6,
2006 - "Ottilie's Legacy May Save Lives"
The Villager - Apr. 5-11, 2006 -
"Drummer beats anthrax, but cleanup has him reeling"
The New York Post - Apr. 10, 2006
- "'Thrax Dancer 'Burned'"
The Hartford Courant - Apr. 10,
2006 - "At Odds Over Anthrax"
Forbes (AP) - Apr. 11, 2006 -
Seek Leak Sources in Anthrax Suit"
Washington Post - Apr. 12,
2006 - "Depositions Taken In Anthrax Case"
The Washington Times - Apr. 13,
2006 - "FBI defends directive limiting supervisors' terms"
Newsday.com - Apr. 18, 2006 - "Fort
Detrick had multiple anthrax leaks in 2001-02, report finds"
Asbury Park Press - Apr. 21, 2006
- "Inventory check shows liquid anthrax missing from state lab"
6ABC.com - Apr. 21, 2006 - "Anthrax
Unaccounted for in NJ"
NewJersey.com - Apr. 22, 2006 - "
State lab can't account for 2 anthrax test tubes"
The Philadelphia Inquirer - Apr.
22, 2006 - "Anthrax inventory doesn't add up at lab"
The Courier- Post - Apr. 22, 2006
- "2 anthrax samples missing"
The Newark Star-Ledger - Apr. 22,
2006 - "Anthrax vials could be missing, but health aides play down risk"
The Star-Ledger - Apr. 25, 2006 -
"Anthrax stolen? FBI expresses doubt as it talks to lab workers"
FoxNews.com - Apr. 25, 2006 -
Mice, Anthrax Missing From N.J. Labs"
The Asbury Park Press - Apr. 26,
2006 - "Officials seek reform amid search for anthrax, mice"
The Newark Star-Ledger - Apr. 27,
2006 - "Probe continues into 2 missing anthrax vials"
NorthJersey.com - Apr. 27, 2006 -
"Clerical mistake remains focus of 'missing' anthrax"
The Birmingham News - Apr. 30, 2006
- "Anthrax error in 2004 revealed lab problems"
The Newark Star-Ledger - May 3, 2006
- "2 anthrax samples found mislabeled in state lab cache"
The Washington Business Journal -
May 5, 2006 - "BioPort wins $120M anthrax-vaccine contract"
WAVY.com (AP) - May 16, 2006 - "Supreme
Court declines to hear lawsuits over anthrax"
The Press Gazette - May 23, 2006
- "Photographer sues Enquirer for pics lost in anthrax attack"
The Richmond Times-Dispatch - May
27, 2006 - "Anthrax case over; problems persist"
The New York Sun - June 5, 2006 -
"Deal With Wen Ho Lee Begets Warning of Yet More Claims"
The New York Post - June 5, 2006
- "The FBI's Failure"
The New York Post (Editorial) - June
6, 2006 - ". . . and Chuck's Biowar Warning"
Slate magazine - June 6, 2006 - "Wen
Ho Ho Ho Lee Gets Last Laugh"
The New York Daily News - June 8,
2006 - "A dancer beats drum & anthrax"
The Baltimore Chronicle (Commentary)
- June 14, 2006 - "How Fort Detrick Expansion Threatens Town of
The Frederick News-Post (Commentary)
- June 15, 2006 - "Jack be NIMBY"
The Villager - June 21-27, 2006 -
"Dancer is riding high after recovery from anthrax"
The Washington Times - June 23,
2006 - "FBI's Mason to head investigations"
The Sun-Sentinel - July 9, 2006 -
"Persistent disputes keep Boca Raton AMI building sealed off"
Washington Post - July 27,
2006 - "New FBI Division To Probe Weapons Terrorists May Use"
MSNBC.com (The Washington Post) - July 30, 2006 - "The secretive
fight against bioterror" (X)
The Baltimore Sun - July 30, 2006
- "A Spy Among Us?"
Chemical & Engineering News -
July 31, 2006 - "Select Agents"
The Seattle Times (The Washington
Post) - Aug. 1, 2006 - "Custom-built pathogens raise bioterror fears"
Washington Post - Aug. 2, 2006
- "9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon"
The Mercury News - Aug. 7, 2006 -
"The person who mailed anthrax spores in 2001 remains at large"
BBC News - Aug. 16, 2006 - "Man dies
from 'rare anthrax bug'"
The Scotsman (Reuters) - Aug. 16,
2006 - "Man dies from anthrax"
The Scotsman - Aug. 18, 2006 - "Bongo
fears in anthrax probe"
CBC News - Aug. 24, 2006 - "Sask.
records second human anthrax case"
Applied and Environmental Microbiology -
August, 2006 - Dr. Douglas Beecher's article.
Technology Review (pages 13-19) - Sept. 2006 - "Decoding the Origin of
Washington Post - Sept. 3,
2006 - "Hardball Tactics in an Era of Threats"
The Scotsman - Sept. 5, 2006 - "9/11
anthrax scientists brought in to trace source of dead man's infection"
The New York Sun - Sept. 8, 2006
- "Judge Dismisses Photographer's Anthrax Lawsuit"
The Guardian (UK) - Sept. 9, 2006
- "Whatever happened to ... the anthrax attacks?"
NBC News - Sept.
13, 2006 - "My anthrax survivor's story" (X)
The Palm Beach Post - Sept. 14, 2006
- "Anthrax victim's widow wants answers"
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel -
Sept. 14, 2006 - "Widow of Boca anthrax victim tries to keep case in
after 5 years"
The Winchester Star - Sept. 15, 2006
- "Anthrax victim left with few answers"
The Houston Chronicle - Sept. 16,
2006 - "5 years after terror of anthrax, case grows colder"
- Sept. 18, 2006 - "Anthrax Investigation A 'Cold Case?'" (X)
MSNBC.com - Sept. 18, 2006 - "FBI
official leading anthrax probe off the case"
San Francisco Chronicle - Sept. 20,
2006 - "5 years later, anthrax deaths a mystery"
The Hartford Courant - Sept. 22,
2006 - "New Anthrax Theory Offered"
CBS News - Sept. 23, 2006 - "Is Mail
Safer Since Anthrax Attacks?"
Washington Post - Sept. 25, 2006 - "FBI Is Casting A Wider Net in
Slate Magazine - Sept. 25, 2006 -
"Anthrax for the Memories - The Washington Post's 'rowback.'"
US News & World Report (Opinion)
- Sept. 25, 2006 - "Anthrax"
The New York Times - Sept. 26, 2006
- "Anthrax Not Weapons-Grade, Official Says"
The Mercury News - Sept. 26, 2006
- "After 5 years, mystery of anthrax attacks widens"
Congressman Rush Holt - Sept. 27, 2006
- Letter to FBI Director Mueller
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer -
Sept. 27, 2006 - "Congressman wants FBI anthrax briefing"
FBI Asst. Dir. Eleni P. Kalisch - Sept.
28, 2006 - The FBI's response to Congressman Holt
Associated Press - Sept. 28, 2006 - "FBI
denies overestimating anthrax power"
The Register (UK) - Sept. 29, 2006
- "Low-tech anthrax still deadly? FBI research widens suspect list"
Journal for Intelligence and Counterintelligence - Oct. 2006 -
Intelligence in Retrospect: The 2001 Anthrax Letters Powder"
The Sun-Sentinel - Oct. 1, 2006 "Five
years after anthrax attacks, are we any safer?"
Congressman Rush Holt - Oct. 2, 2006 -
Response to response from FBI
Chemical & Engineering News -
Oct. 2, 2006 - "Anthrax Redux"
Seed Magazine - Oct. 2, 2006 - "Some
Lessons Learned From The Anthrax Attacks"
The Times of New Jersey - Oct. 3,
2006 - "Anthrax probe update sought"
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer (AP)
- Oct. 3, 2006 - "Hunt for anthrax killer still going on"
The Frederick News-Post - Oct. 4,
2006 - "Five years later, and few answers in anthrax probe"
The Palm Beach Post - Oct. 5, 2006
- "Anthrax attacks fodder for rumors"
The Sun-Sentinel - Oct. 5, 2006 -
"Days of fear, turmoil still vivid after 5 years after anthrax attacks
The Miami Herald - Oct. 5, 2006 -
"Solving case may take many years"
USA Today - Oct. 5, 2006 - "Anthrax
suspect as elusive as bin Laden"
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel -
Oct. 6, 2006 - "Chronology of anthrax events"
Boca Raton News - Oct. 6, 2006 -
"Anthrax still real concern five years after AMI attack"
Washington Post - Oct. 7, 2006
- "Probe of Anthrax Attacks Casts Shadow on Brothers"
The Hartford Courant - Oct. 8,
2006 - "Security Fears At Anthrax Labs"
The Newark Star-Ledger - Oct. 9,
2006 - "Questions on anthrax swirl anew for the FBI"
Investors Business Daily - Oct. 9,
2006 - "How FBI Blew The Anthrax Case By Profiling Everyone But Muslims"
BBC News - Oct. 12, 2006 - "
in Anthrax death probe"
ABC 7 News (AP) - Oct. 13, 2006 -
to Be Held in Suit Over Newspaper Anthrax Columns"
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel -
Oct. 15, 2006 - "Anthrax attacks remain unsolved"
Washington Post (Opinion) -
Oct. 15, 2006 - "The Unsolved Case Of Anthrax"
The Washington Times (Commentary)
- Oct. 16, 2006 - "Anthrax in review"
The Times (of New Jersey) - Oct.
16, 2006 - "Recalling anthrax terror"
NBC4.tv (Los Angeles) - Oct. 18, 2006
- "Anthrax Threat Five Years Later; Are We Safer?" (X)
Washington Post (AP) - Oct.
23, 2006 - "Judge: Times Must Reveal Anthrax Sources"
The Associated Press - Oct. 23, 2006
- "Times ordered to disclose sources in anthrax libel suit"
Senator Grassley -
Oct. 23, 2006 - Letter to Attorney General Gonzales
Washington Post - Oct. 24,
2006 - "New York Times Columnist Must Reveal Sources, Judge Rules"
The New York Times - Oct. 24, 2006
- "Times Is Ordered to Reveal Columnist’s Sources"
The New York Sun - Oct. 24, 2006
- "Federal Judge Orders New York Times To Identify Confidential Sources"
NBC News - Oct.
24, 2006 - "Congress, FBI battle over anthrax investigation" (X)
The Washington Times - Oct. 25,
2006 - "FBI hit for anthrax 'dead-ends'"
The New York Sun - Oct. 25, 2006
- "Top GOP Senator Joins Critics of FBI Anthrax Probe"
Washington Post - Oct. 25,
2006 - "Anthrax Mystery and Misery Linger for Postal Workers"
Reporters Committee - Oct. 25, 2006
- "New York Times ordered to reveal sources in anthrax case"
The New York Sun - Oct. 26, 2006
- "New York Times Gets Two Extra Days To Disclose Confidential Sources"
The Journal News - Oct. 30, 2006
- "Federal anthrax lawsuit pending in White Plains"
The Knoxville News-Sentinel - Oct.
30, 2006 - "Senator questions anthrax probe"
Washington Post - Oct. 31,
2006 - "Suspect and A Setback In Al-Qaeda Anthrax Case"
GovExec.com - Oct. 31, 2006 -
seek audit of more than $18 billion in biodefense spending"
The New York Sun - Nov. 2, 2006 -
"N.Y. Times Must Disclose Sources for Anthrax Columns, Judge Rules"
Washington Post (AP) - Nov.
3, 2006 - "N.Y. Times Must Disclose Anthrax Sources"
The New York Times - Nov. 3, 2006 -
"Setback for Times in Anthrax Suit"
The Los Angeles Times - Nov. 3, 2006
- "Many fear FBI's anthrax case is cold"
The New York Sun - Nov. 16, 2006
- "Steven Hatfill Demands Fines for N.Y. Times"
Reporters Without Borders - Nov.
16, 2006 - "The New York Times refuses to reveal one of its
sources and risks being fined"
The New York Times - Nov. 18, 2006
- "Judge’s Ruling Bars The Times From Using Sources’ Information in
Newsday (AP) - Nov. 18, 2006 - "Judge
bars N.Y. Times from using sources in libel defense"
Reporters Committee For Freedom Of
The Press - Nov. 20, 2006 - "Judge limits Times defense in libel suit"
Associated Press - Nov. 20, 2006 - "Judge
bars N.Y. Times from using info from 2 sources in lawsuit"
The Slate - Nov. 28, 2006 - "Hatfill
v. Hatfill - The bio-warfare scientist and his dueling lawsuits"
South Florida Sun-Sentinel - Nov.
29, 2006 - "Anthrax site cleanup may finally near end"
The New York Times - Dec. 2, 2006 -
"Times Asks End to Suit on Anthrax Inquiry"
Associated Press - Dec. 2, 2006 - "Times
Asks Judge to Dismiss Libel Suit"
Chemical & Engineering News -
Dec. 4, 2006 - "Science aids a nettlesome FBI criminal probe"
The Houston Chronicle (AP) - Dec.
6, 2006 - "Senators rap FBI over domestic spying program"
CNN - Dec. 6, 2006 - "Mueller, senators
Associated Press (Newsday) - Dec. 7,
2006 - "FBI Probes Media Leaks in Corruption Cases"
Middle East Times - Dec. 11, 2006
- "Anthrax attack on US Congress made by scientists and covered up by
Letter to Attorney General Gonzales - Dec.
11, 2006 - Request for briefing of Senate on status of case
The Houston Chronicle (AP) - Dec. 12,
2006 - "Congress demands answers on anthrax"
The Washington Times - Dec. 13,
2006 - "Bipartisan Hill group seeks briefing by FBI"
The Sun-Sentinel (AP) - Dec. 13,
2006 - "Anthrax cleanup near conclusion in Boca"
The Sun-Sentinel (Columnist) - Dec.
14, 2006 - "Anthrax investigation has no answers, but secrecy abounds"
Free-Market News - Dec. 21, 2006
- "Boyle: Feds Were Behind Anthrax Attacks
Infectious Disease Society - Jan.
4, 2007 - "Anthrax attack posed greater potential threat than thought"
Newsday.com (AP) - Jan. 6, 2007 -
lawyer: Times editor warned columnist on anthrax piece"
The New York Times - Jan. 6, 2007 -
"Editor’s E-Mail May Be Used in Suit Against The Times"
USA Today - Jan. 8, 2007 - "Study:
People outside Senate office infected with anthrax"
The San Francisco Chronicle (AP) -
Dismisses NY Times Libel Case"
The New York Times - Jan. 12, 2007
- "Judge Rejects Defamation Suit Against The Times"
Washington Post - Jan. 13,
2007 - "Suit Against Times to Be Tossed Out"
Melbourne Independent Media Center - Jan. 21, 2007 - "Anthrax: Who
and Why" (X)
FAS - Secrecy News - Jan. 22, 2007
- "The State Secrets Doctrine and the Hatfill Case"
Newsday.com (AP) - Jan. 29, 2007
- "New York anthrax victim to thank doctors in Pa. dance performance"
FAS - Secrecy News - Jan. 30, 2007
- "More on State Secrets and the Hatfill Case"
The New York Times - Feb. 2, 2007 -
"Judge Explains His Dismissal of Scientist’s Suit Against Times"
Washington Post - Feb. 2, 2007
- "Judge Explains Tossing Out Suit Against N.Y. Times"
The New York Sun - Feb. 2, 2007 -
"Judge Gives Rationale for Tossing Hatfill Suit Against Times"
Newsday.com (AP) - Feb. 2, 2007 -
"Judge explains dismissal of anthrax libel case against NY Times"
The Miami Herald - Feb. 8, 2007 -
"Building is free of anthrax, but mystery remains"
The Palm Beach Post - Feb. 8, 2007
- "Former AMI building declared free of anthrax contamination"
Florida Today (AP) - Feb. 12, 2007 -
"Quarantine lifted after anthrax attack"
The Sun-Sentinel - Feb 22, 2007 -
"Signs of life return to Boca Raton anthrax building"
The Palm Beach Post - Feb. 22, 2007
- "AMI building officially reopens, to be renamed Crown Commerce Center"
The Washington Times (Columnist)
- Feb. 24, 2007 - "Terrorism is not rocket science"
The New York Sun - Feb. 27, 2007
- "Hatfill Settles $10M Libel Lawsuit"
Hatfill v Foster et al - Feb.,
2007 - Settlement Statement from Dr. Hatfill's lawyers
The Journal News - Mar. 1, 2007 -
"'Person of interest' in '01 anthrax attacks settles defamation case"
The Muskegon Chronicle - Mar. 1,
2007 - "Deadly anthrax mystery still at an official dead end"
Congressman Rush Holt - Mar.
2, 2007 - Letters requesting a hearing on the Amerithrax investigation
The Trenton Times - Mar. 3, 2007
- "Holt wants status of anthrax probe"
Homeland Defense News - Mar. 5, 2007
- "LAW and ORDER Meets BIO Crime"
The Times of New Jersey (Editorial)
- Mar. 7, 2007 - "Unfinished Business"
Washington Post (AP) - Mar. 10,
2007 - "U.S. Struggles With Bioterror Defenses"
CBS News - Mar. 9, 2007 - "Tables Turned
In Anthrax Probe"
CBS - 60 Minutes - Mar. 11, 2007 -
Turned In Anthrax Probe" (#2)
The Wall Street Journal - Mar. 16, 2007
- "KSM's World War"
grassley.senate.gov - Mar. 27, 2007
- "Grassley Statement at The FBI Oversight Hearing"
The New York Sun - Apr. 4, 2007 -
"Judge Urges Hatfill To Compel Outing of Sources"
Salon.com (commentary) - Apr. 5,
2007 - "National journalists believe you should trust them"
Reporters Committee for Freedom of
the Press - Apr. 6, 2007 - "Judge urges plaintiff in anthrax case to
Salon.com (commentary) - Apr. 9,
2007 - "The unresolved story of ABC News' false Saddam-anthrax reports"
American Thinker (commentary) - Apr.
9, 2007 - "Anthrax: some new findings"
Asbury Park Press - Apr. 11, 2007
- "Holt wants answers from FBI on anthrax"
The Newark Star-Ledger - Apr. 11,
2007 - "Postal union leaders protest probe into anthrax attacks"
postalmag.com - Apr. 11, 2007 - "New
Leads in Anthrax Case?"
Salon.com (commentary) - Apr. 11,
2007 - "Response from ABC News re: the Saddam-anthrax reports"
The Princeton Packet - Apr. 13, 2007
- "Anthrax postal attacks remain unsolved, five years later"
The New York Sun - Apr. 18, 2007
- "Free Press Battle Looms in Hatfill Case"
- Apr. 28, 2007 - "Bioterror scientist cites lack of funds"
The Blog of "Legal Times" - May 1,
2007 - "The Media's Strange Ally"
The San Francisco Chronicle - May
3, 2007 - "Bipartisan bid in Congress for law to shield journalists"
The Palm Beach Post - May 16, 2007
- "Tabloid building bargain for buyer"
The Examiner - June 1, 2007 -
to run biohazard cleanup test"
The Gainesville Sun (AP) - June 11,
2007 - "State justices asked to resolve legal question in anthrax
WNBC.com - June 21, 2007 - "Whitman
Criticizes Giuliani Admin. On Handling Of Anthrax Scare"
Journal - June 27, 2007 - "Role of Law Enforcement Response and
Forensics in Investigation of Bioterrorism" or HERE
The Los Angeles Times - July 1, 2007
- "Selling the threat of bioterrorism"
Washington Post - July 4, 2007
- "Scientist Presses Case For Reporters' Sources"
The Associate Press - July 4, 2007 -
"Hatfill Seeks Reporters' Anthrax Sources"
New Scientist Magazine - July 5,
2007 - "Plague of bioweapons accidents afflicts the US"
TurkishPress.com - July 17, 2007
- "US admits anthrax attacks still a mystery"
Forbes.com (AP) - Aug. 13, 2007 -
Told to Testify in Leak Case"
Washington Post - Aug. 14,
2007 - "Source Disclosure Ordered in Anthrax Suit"
The New York Times - Aug. 14, 2007
- "5 Reporters Ordered to Testify About Government Sources"
Reporters Committee For Freedom Of
The Press - Aug. 14, 2007 - "Five journalists ordered to reveal Hatfill
Reporters Without Borders - Aug.
17, 2007 - "New threat to confidentiality in judge’s decision ordering
five journalists to disclose sources of reports on anthrax attacks
Marin Independent Journal - Aug.
25, 2007 - "Peter Scheer: Congress needs to approve a federal shield
The Times of New Jersey - Sept. 2,
2007 - "Antidote or sleight of hand?"
The Danbury News-Times - Sept. 5,
2007 - "Two members of Danbury family contract anthrax"
The New York Times - Sept. 6, 2007
- "Anthrax Is Found in 2 Connecticut Residents, One a Drummer"
The New York Times - Sept. 6, 2007
- "Connecticut Property Contaminated With Anthrax Spores"
The Danbury News-Times - Sept. 9,
2007 - "Anthrax has long history"
The Los Angeles Times (Opinion) -
Sept. 11, 2007 - "More reasons to shield journalists"
The Danbury News-Times - Sept. 12,
2007 - "Anthrax poses ‘no risk’ to public"
The Danbury News-Times - Sept. 15,
2007 - "Crews work to rid Padanaram Road house of anthrax"
The Waco Tribune Herald - Sept. 17,
2007 - "Editorial: Free flow of information needed"
The New York Sun - Sept. 28, 2007
- "Journalist Ross of ABC Ordered To Disclose Sources"
Associated Press - Oct. 2, 2007 -
Seeks Contempt for Journalists"
NewsDay.com - Oct. 3, 2007 - "Postal
workers union wants more answers on 2001 anthrax scare"
The Reporters Committee for Freedom
of the Press - Oct. 3, 2007 - "Hatfill seeks contempt citations for
The Los Angeles Times - Oct. 3, 2007
- "Study of bioterror agents adds to risk"
The Dallas Morning News - Oct. 4,
2007 - "Texas A&M hearing reveals lack of oversight in country's
The Palm Beach Post - Oct. 5, 2007
- "Scripps helps on anthrax fighter"
The Palm Beach Post - Oct. 6, 2007
- "Widow wants answers"
The Denver Post - Oct. 10, 2007 -
"Newspaper execs speak out"
The Blogger News Network - Oct. 16,
2007 - "An Interview With Terry Turchie About Hunting The American
American Thinker - Nov. 9, 2007 -
"Startling implications of a Jihadi letter"
News - Nov. 13, 2007 - "Anthrax And Al Qaeda" (X)
Frederick News-Post (Columnist) - Nov. 19, 2007 - "Detrick meeting
Kansas City Star - Nov. 24, 2007 - "U.S. remains vulnerable to anthrax
attack, experts say" (X)
Badger Herald - Nov. 30, 2007 - "Barrett continues conspiracy theory"
Los Angeles Times - Dec. 2, 2007 - "New anthrax vaccine doomed by
Arizona Republic - Dec. 16, 2007 - "Finding link to anthrax, professor
set NAU apart" (X)
Associated Press - Dec. 20, 2007 - "Reporters Say Hatfill Partly to
- Jan. 2, 2008 - "Former CBS Newser Defies Court, Won’t Reveal Sources"
Los Angeles Times - Jan. 11, 2008 - "Lawsuit claims 3 leaked name in
Los Angeles Times - Jan. 12, 2008 - "U.S. attorney's office accused of
anthrax case leaks" (X)
Newsweek - Jan.
28, 2008 - "Fishing for a Way to Change the World" (X)
Spectator (Laurie Mylroie) - Jan. 29, 2008 - "Mystery of the WMDs"
- Feb. 1, 2008 - "Creating a Great Place to Work" (X)
The Times (of New Jersey) - Feb.
19, 2008 - "Ex-mayor in Texas to share anthrax insight"
Press - Feb. 19, 2008 - "Judge May Hold Reporter in Contempt" (X)
Committee - Feb. 19, 2008 - "Reporters Committee calls for shield law
Locy held in contempt" (X)
Today - Feb. 19, 2008 - "Judge holds reporter in contempt in anthrax
New York Times - Feb. 20, 2008 - "Reporter Held in Contempt in Anthrax
Wall Street Journal (Opinion by Judith Miller) - Feb. 21, 2008 -
on Trial" (X)
Times West Virginian - Feb. 21, 2008 - "WVU students get firsthand
on anonymous sources" (X)
Wall Street Journal - Feb. 23, 2008 - "Refusing to Name Sources,
May Face Big Fines" (X)
Tribune-Review - Feb. 25, 2008 - "Reporter risks ruin to protect
News & World Report - Feb. 25, 2008 - "Hair Tells Tale of Where
Huffington Post (Opinion) - Feb. 25, 2008 - "Sacrificing the First
The New York Sun -
Feb. 27, 2008 - "U.N. Inspector Gets a Rash, Raising Contamination
Reading (PA) Eagle - Feb. 28, 2008 - "Shield law needed to protect
Los Angeles Times - Mar. 2, 2008 - "Crying wolf over bioterrorism"
Washington Post - Mar. 3, 3008 - "Time for a Shield Law"
Associated Press - Mar. 7, 2008 - "Anthrax Reporter Held in Contempt"(X)
Cleveland Plain Dealer - Mar. 9, 2008 - "Judge accused of trying to
Associated Press - Mar. 10, 2008 - "Reporter Tries to Block Daily Fines"
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (Press Release) - Mar. 10,
2008 - "Reporter's Toolkit: Toni Locy contempt citation" (X)
L.A. Times - Mar. 11, 2008 - "Anthrax case judge orders ex-reporter to
reveal sources or pay fines" (X)
(WV) Daily Mail - Mar. 11, 2008 - "WVU professor defying U.S. judges"(X)
Associated Press - March 11, 2008 - "Court Blocks Fines Against
& Publisher - March 11, 2008 - "Media Coalition Letter Urges Shield
Law Approval" (X)
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (editorial) - March 11, 2008 - "Wretched
Today (Editorial) - March 12, 2008 - "The real cost of fining a
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (opinion) - March 13, 2008 - "Wrong, Trib,
Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Editorial) - March 13, 2008 - "A clash of
than titanic import?" (X)
Today (Opinion) - March 14, 2008 - "'Whistle-blowing' or just blowing
Wall Street Journal (Opinion) - March 15, 2008 - "Justice and the Press"
Associated Press - March 15, 2008 - "Recently Subpoenaed Journalists"
Post-Intelligencer - March 15, 2008 - "Media shield law remains in
- March 16, 2008 - "USA Today case builds momentum for reporter shield
New York Times - March 17, 2008 - "With Order to Name Sources, Judge Is
Casting a Wide Net" (X)
Review - March 20, 2008 - "'Hell on Heels'" (X)
Daily Press (AP) - Mar. 21, 2008 - "Attorneys argue anthrax libel case
filed against New York Times" (X)
Philadelphia Inquirer - Mar. 23, 2008 - "The Point: Media - and public
- need strong shield law" (X)
Wall Street Journal - Mar. 26, 2008 - "Appalling Intrusion Into
Chicago Tribune (Opinion) - Mar. 27, 2008 - "The news media vs. the
San Francisco Chronicle (Opinion) - Mar. 27, 2008 - "Federal shield law
protects the public interest" (X)
News - Mar. 28, 2008 - "FBI Focusing on 'About Four' Suspects in 2001
Associated Press - Mar. 28, 2008 - "Reversal Urged in Journalist's Case"
New York Post - Mar. 29, 2008 - "CLOSING IN ON ANTHRAX FIEND" (X)
Statesman - Apr. 7, 2008 - "The Justice Department fights PR battle
media shield bill" (X)
Today - Apr. 14, 2008 - "McCain, Obama back law shielding reporters"
www.slate.com - Apr. 17,
2008 - "Source Hygiene" (X)
New York Times (Opinion) - Apr. 20, 2008 - "Squeezed by the Courts"
Associated Press - May 5, 2008 - "Florida court to hear arguments in
death lawsuit" (X)
Fort Mill (SC) Times - May 5, 2008 - "Supreme Court hears arguments in
anthrax death lawsuit" (X)
Press - May 9, 2008 - "Reporter challenges ruling over sources in
WV Record - May 23, 2008 - "Judge who found WVU prof in comtempt
at WVSU ceremony" (X)
- June 20, 2008 - "National Press Club Honors Outstanding Journalism"
Press - June 27, 2008 - "$5.8 million for scientist in anthrax lawsuit"
Angeles Times - June 27, 2008 - "U.S. settles with anthrax mailings
of interest' Steven Hatfill" (X)
Today - June 27, 2008 - "Scientist in anthrax lawsuit gets $5.8M" (X)
New York Times - June 28, 2008 - "Scientist Is Paid Millions by U.S. in
Anthrax Suit" (X)
Washington Post - June 28, 2008 - "U.S. Settles With Scientist Named in
Los Angeles Times - June 28, 2008 - "Leaks, focus on single suspect
anthrax probe" (X)
Wall Street Journal (Opinion) - June 30, 2008 - "The Anthrax Fiasco"(X)
News - June 30, 2008 - "EXCLUSIVE: How the FBI Botched the Anthrax Case"(X)
Register (UK) - July 2, 2008 - "$5.8m payout draws line under FBI's
Washington Post (Editorial) - July 3, 2008 - "The Hatfill Case"
- July 3, 2008 - "What Price Justice?" (X)
Palm Beach Post (Editorial) - July 5, 2008 - "Still an anthrax mystery"
Hill - July 9, 2008 - "Mukasey takes heat, but not like Gonzales did"
News - July 14, 2008 - "Cheney Thought He Had Lethal Anthrax Dose"
New York Sun - July 14, 2008 - "Times Wins in Libel Suit Brought By
Anthrax Suspect" (X)
Press - July 14, 2008 - "Court rules for NY Times in anthrax libel case"
New York Times - July 15, 2008 - "Dismissal of Suit Against Times Is
Committee - July 15, 2008 - "Appellate court affirms summary judgment
Hatfill libel suit" (X)
Washington Post - July 16, 2008 - "Obama Remarks On Confronting
National Radio (Australia) - July 17, 2008 - "The forensic guy from the
News - July 19, 2008 - "At the FBI, Cold Cases Are Not a Thing of the
Maryland Daily Record - July 21, 2008 - "No malice found in Hatfill
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Anthrax suspect dies in apparent
Washington Post - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Md. Anthrax Scientist Dies in
Associated Press - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Dead Army vaccine scientist eyed in
anthrax probe" (X)
Miami Herald - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Anthrax survivor: Suspect's suicide
me feel secure'" (X)
Washington Post - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Anthrax Victims React to Ivins' Death
With Mixed Emotions"
American - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Government scientist accused of
2001 anthrax mailings dies in apparent suicide" (X)
News - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Anthrax Scientist Kills Himself as FBI Closes In"
News-Post - Aug. 1, 2008 - "Detrick anthrax scientist commits suicide
FBI closes in" (X)
New York Times - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Vindication May Be Near for Hatfill"
New York Times - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Scientist’s Suicide Linked to Anthrax
New York Times - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Anthrax Suspect’s Death Is Dark End
a Family Man" (X)
New York Post - Aug. 2, 2008 - "'THRAX MAN WAS A SPORE LOSER" (X)
New York Post (Editorial) - Aug. 2, 2008 - "ANTHRAX: STILL NO ANSWERS"
Hartford Courant - Aug. 2, 2008 - "New Hope For Answers In Anthrax Case"(X)
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins stood
to benefit from a panic" (X)
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Anthrax Suspect Commits Suicide"
Post - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Scientist Set to Discuss Plea Bargain In Deadly
Attacks Commits Suicide"
Press - Aug. 2, 2008 - "After Suicide, Feds Consider Closing Anthrax
York Daily News - Aug. 2, 2008 - "FBI was told to blame Anthrax scare
Al Qaeda by White House officials" (X)
Baltimore Sun - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Long under suspicion" (X)
(audio) - Aug. 2, 2008 - "Colleagues: Ivins' Suicide Not Proof Of Guilt"
New York Times - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Anthrax Case Renews Questions on
Press - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Daschle criticizes FBI's handling of anthrax
York Post - Aug. 3, 2008 - "MAD 'THRAX GENIUS WAS BANKING ON SUCCESS IN
THE MAIL" (X)
Baltimore Sun - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Ivins' old neighbors questioned in
Press (LONG) - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Scientist: DNA led agents to anthrax
Press (short) - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Scientist: DNA led agents to anthrax
Press - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Is another Bruce Ivins lurking in a biolab?"
- Aug. 3, 2008 - "Anthrax Indictment May Have Been Weeks Away" (X)
- Aug. 3, 2008 - "Woman's ties to anthrax case unclear" (X)
Today - Aug. 3, 2008 - "Q&A about anthrax and the investigation"
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 4, 2008 - "Anthrax blend led FBI to Ivins"
New York Times - Aug. 4, 2008 - "Anthrax Evidence Is Called
- Aug. 4, 2008 - " Anthrax suspect obsessed with sorority, officials
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 4, 2008 - "Forensics Gave Investigators
to Work With" (X)
MSNBC.com - Aug.
4, 2008 - "Anthrax suspect’s colleague blames FBI for suicide" (X)
- Aug. 4, 2008 - "Case Closed? Does Anthrax Suspect's Suicide Mean the
Investigation Into 2001 Attacks Is Over?" (X)
(Jacksonville) - Aug. 4, 2008 - "Lake Tyler Man Explains Anthrax
Press - Aug. 4, 2008 - "Anthrax suspect was a prolific scientific
Register (UK) - Aug. 4, 2008 - "Inside the tent, the best bioterrorist
money could buy?" (X)
Washington Post - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Anthrax Dryer a Key To Probe"
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Pressure Grows to Release
in Anthrax Case" (X)
Wall Street Journal (Opinion) - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Bruce Ivins Wasn't the
Anthrax Culprit" (X)
New York Times - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Pressure Grows for F.B.I.’s Anthrax
Magazine - Aug. 5, 2008 - "How Solid is the Anthrax Evidence?" (X)
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Not the FBI's proudest moment"
Press - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Some of the remaining gaps in the FBI anthrax
Press - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Some answers, but not all, likely in anthrax
Boston Globe - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Anthrax deaths turned attention toward
Scientist - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Anthrax genes will point to perpetrator"
News-Post - Aug. 5, 2008 - "'I'm scared to death' of Ivins, Duley
New York Post - Aug. 5, 2008 - "Dr. Anthrax was Kreepy Kappa Lover"
- Aug. 6, 2008 - "Transcript of Amerithrax Investigation Press
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 6, 2008 - "FBI to reveal evidence in anthrax
Hartford Courant - Aug. 6, 2008 - "Anthrax Vaccine Safety Complaints
Of Ivins Case" (X)
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 6, 2008 - "FBI's Anthrax Case Relies on
Discovered on a Flask" (X)
New York Times - Aug. 6, 2008 - "Justice Dept. Set to Share Details in
Anthrax Case" (X)
Washington Post - Aug. 6, 2008 - "Tales of Addiction, Anxiety, Ranting"
Washington Post - Aug. 6, 2008 - "FBI to Show How Genetics Led to
- Aug. 6, 2008 - "U.S. Judge Unseals Documents In Anthrax Case" (X)
- Aug. 6, 2008 - "Ross Responds to "Vital Questions" About Anthrax
Press - Aug. 7, 2008 - " Despite demons, Ivins stayed at high-security
Grassley - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Grassley Seeks Answers to FBI’S Amerithrax
New York Times - Aug. 7, 2008 - "F.B.I. Presents Anthrax Case, Saying
Acted Alone" (X)
Washington Post - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Documents List Essential Clues"
Washington Post - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Acquaintances and Counselor Recall
Scientist's Dark Side"
Baltimore Sun - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Doubts persist on Ivins' guilt" (X)
NY Daily News - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Anthrax mailer feared his life's work
over, prosecutors say" (X)
Scientist - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Investigators 'confident' Ivins was anthrax
News-Post - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Excerpts from e-mails Bruce Ivins sent to a
News-Post - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Ivins alone responsible for attacks, feds
Slate.com - Aug. 7, 2008
- "The Adventures of Jimmy flathead - The Internet postings of Bruce
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Veteran Investigators Played
Roles in FBI Probe" (X)
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 7, 2008 - "FBI Paints Chilling Portrait Of
(Madison, WI) - Aug. 7, 2008 - "Anthrax case link to Wisconsin examined"
Washington Post - Aug. 8, 2008 - "New Details Show Anthrax Suspect Away
On Key Day"
New York Times - Aug. 8, 2008 - "From a Helper to the Suspect in the
New York Times (Editorial) - Aug. 8, 2008 - "Identifying the Anthrax
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 8, 2008 - "Anthrax investigation should be
congressmen say" (X)
Press - Aug. 8, 2008 - "Army post tarnished by 'devastating' anthrax
Times Herald - Aug. 8, 2008 - "Four years after FBI raid, Dr. Berry
on with life" (X)
Oregonian - Aug. 8, 2008 - "Director of Oregon's primate lab says she
stalked by anthrax suspect" (X)
Herald-Mail - Aug. 8, 2008 - "Ex-colleague questions government’s case
against anthrax suspect" (X)
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 8, 2008 - "The Ivins Dossier" (X)
New York Post - Aug. 8, 2008 - "DR. DOOM MOURNED VA. TECH. WOMAN" (X)
- Aug. 8, 2008 - "Full NPR Interview With Ivins' Attorney Paul Kemp"
New York Times - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Scientist Officially Exonerated in
Washington Post - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Prosecutors Clear Hatfill in Anthrax
New York Times - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Doubts Persist Among Anthrax Suspect’s
New York Times (Opinion) - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Open Questions on a Closed
- Aug. 9, 2008 - "Army to Probe Security of U.S. Laboratory That
Wall Street Journal - Aug. 9, 2008 - "In Anthrax Case, Hindsight Shifts
View of Ivins" (X)
Associated Press - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Analysis: What if a jury heard the
Associated Press - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Ivins remembered for intelligence,
Newsweek - Aug. 9, 2008
- "The Case Still Isn’t Closed" (X)
Burlington [VT] Free Press - Aug. 9, 2008 - "Leahy waits for anthrax
New York Times - Aug. 10, 2008 - "Anthrax Case Had Costs for Suspects"(X)
Baltimore Sun - Aug. 10, 2008 - "Anthrax suspect said to have been
and compassionate" (X)
Philadelphia Inquirer - Aug. 10, 2008 - "Chester man wants his name
in anthrax case" (X)
Philadelphia Inquirer - Aug. 10, 2008 - "DNA is just anthrax clue, not
(Hanover, PA) Evening Sun - Aug. 10, 2008 - "Fairfield resident recalls
time at Fort Detrick" (X)
Hartford Courant - Aug. 11, 2008 - "State Officials Surprised By Ivins'
Possible Motive" (X)
Philadelphia Inquirer - Aug. 11, 2008 - "For anthrax victim, suicide
Miami Herald (Editorial) - Aug. 11, 2008 - "FBI sows doubt" (X)
Frederick News-Post (Opinion) - Aug. 12, 2008 - "Dutiful decision"
Wall Street Journal (Opinion) - Aug. 12, 2008 - "What If the FBI Is
About Bruce Ivins?" (X)
New York Times (Opinion) - Aug. 12, 2008 - "The Killers in the Lab"
Palm Beach Post (Editorial) - Aug. 12, 2008 - "Settle with the widow in
Boca anthrax killing" (X)
Magazine - Aug. 12, 2008 - "The Anthrax Case: From Spores to a Suspect"
Los Angeles Times (Opinion) - Aug. 13, 2008 - "Our own worst bioenemy"(X)
News-Post - Aug. 13, 2008 - "Talk Back: Do you believe Bruce Ivins was
responsible for the anthrax attacks?" (X)
Today - Aug. 13, 2008 - "Daschle tells reporters about briefing on
HSToday - Aug.
13, 2008 - " Army Review of Anthrax Access May Yield Changes" (X)
Press - Aug. 13, 2008 - "A lone anthrax mailer? Skeptics question FBI
Magazine - Aug. 13, 2008 - "Nagging Questions in the Anthrax Case"
New York Times - Aug. 13, 2008 - "Another Twist in Case of Dead Anthrax
Washington Post - Aug. 14, 2008 - "Hair Samples in Anthrax Case Don't
Eureka Reporter - Aug. 14, 2008 - "Yes, this might have been a real
(Interview with Richard Ebright) - Aug. 14, 2008 - "The Real Bioterror
Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Opinion) - Aug. 14, 2008 - "FBI mishandling
of anthrax case leaves many questions unanswered" (X)
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 15, 2008 - "Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins
under the radar because of FBI obsession" (X)
News - Aug. 15, 2008 - "FBI conclusions in anthrax probe meet
New York Times - Aug. 16, 2008 - "F.B.I. Will Present Scientific
in Anthrax Case to Counter Doubts" (X)
News-Post - Aug. 16, 2008 - "Senate could grill FBI on anthrax
in September" (X)
Hartford Courant - Aug. 16, 2008 - "Labs That Perform Bioterrorism
Palm Beach Post - Aug. 16, 2008 - "Signs of madness boost anthrax suit"
New York Times (Opinion) - Aug. 17, 2008 - "Headlines and Exonerations"
Palm Beach Post - Aug. 17, 2008 - "Anthrax break spurs memories of '01
Conservative Magazine - Aug. 25, 2008 (on line on Aug. 18, 2008) - "The
Anthrax Files" (X)
Press - Aug. 18, 2008 - "Daschle says there are still questions on
Press - Aug. 18, 2008 - "FBI had, then tossed anthrax type used in
ABC News -
Aug. 18, 2008 - "Anthrax Scientist Aided FBI's Probe" (X)
Now - Aug. 18, 2008 - "The Anthrax Case: The Trail of the Spores" (X)
press briefing - Aug. 18, 2008 - "The Science"
New York Times - Aug. 19, 2008 - "F.B.I. Details Anthrax Case, but
Washington Post - Aug. 19, 2008 - "FBI Elaborates on Anthrax Case"
Los Angeles Times - Aug. 19, 2008 - "Scientists elaborate on the case
Bruce Ivins" (X)
- Aug. 19, 2008 - " Army secretary orders review of Fort Detrick
News - Aug. 19, 2008 - " FBI reveals more details of anthrax
News - Aug. 19, 2008 - "FBI to reveal anthrax data" (X)
News-Post - Aug. 20, 2008 - "Scientists still looking for FBI to
anthrax data" (X)
Washington Post (Editorial) - Aug. 20, 2008 - "'Spore on the Grassy
New York Times (Editorial) - Aug. 20, 2008 - "Too Little Information"
- Aug. 20, 2008 - "Ivins' Attorney To Be Interviewed In Congressional
News - Aug. 20, 2008 - "FBI says it easily replicated anthrax used in
(Editorial) - Aug. 20, 2008 - "Case Not Closed" (X)
- Aug. 21, 2008 - "Too close for comfort" (X)
New York Times - Aug. 21, 2008 - "A Trained Eye Finally Solved the
WTOP Radio - Aug.
21, 2008 - "Local scientist helped solve anthrax puzzle" (X)
Daily - Aug. 21, 2008 - "FBI Unveils Science Of Anthrax Investigation"
- Aug. 21, 2008 - "Ivins’ attorney: Don’t blame the FBI" (X)
Albuquerque Journal - Aug. 22, 2008 - "Working In Secret" (X)
Las Cruces Sun-News
- Aug. 24, 2008 - Same as Albuquerque Journal above, but easier to
Today - Aug. 24, 2008 - "FBI explains the science behind the anthrax
& Engineering News - Aug. 25, 2008 - "Validation: FBI's Anthrax
Boston Globe (Opinion) - Aug. 25, 2008 - "Craving the dark magic of
News - Aug. 26, 2008 - "Anthrax probe prompts concerns about military
- Aug. 27, 2008 (opinion) - "White Powder and 007" (X)
New York Times (Opinion) - Aug. 28, 2008 - "Media’s Balancing Act"
Frederick News-Post (Opinion) - Aug. 29, 2008 - "If not Ivins ... "
Philadelphia Inquirer - Sept. 1, 2008 - "Cracking the anthrax case"
Frederick News-Post (Editorial) - Sept. 6, 2008 - "A marathon, not a
New York Times - Sept. 6, 2006 - "Lawmakers Seek Anthrax Details" (X)
Frederick News-Post - Sept. 7, 2008 - "Early anthrax suspect doubts
of Ivins" (X)
Daily Princetonian - Sept. 8, 2008 - "FBI: Anthrax suspect Ivins
with Kappa" (X)
Frederick News-Post - Sept. 11, 2008 - "Science behind the anthrax case"
Register (UK) - Sept. 11, 2008 - "Press proves immune to FBI's anthrax
News - Sept. 11, 2008 - "Ctr for Health & Homeland Security Hosts
to Discuss Anthrax Case" (X)
Examiner (AP) - Sept. 12, 2008 - "Rep. Bartlett skeptical that Ivins
New York Times - Sept. 13, 2008 - "Another Twist in Case of Dead
News-Post - Sept. 13, 2008 - "Congress to take up anthrax investigation"
New York Post (editorial) - Sept. 14, 2008 - "GET ’THRAX FACTS" (X)
Press - Sept. 14, 2008 - "Anthrax probe prompts lab security review"
Jurist - Sept. 15, 2008 (opinion) - "The Anthrax Case: Congress Must
an Independent Inquiry" (X)
Blog of the Legal Times - Sept. 15, 2008 - "New Twist in Hatfill Case"
- Sept. 15, 2008 - "FBI letter to the National Academy of Sciences"
- Sept. 16, 2008 - "FOX News Exclusive: Anonymous Note Casts Doubt on
Frederick News-Post (editorial) - Sept. 16, 2008 - "Mueller on The Hill"
Angeles Times - Sept. 16, 2008 - "Scientist concedes 'honest mistake'
weaponized anthrax" (X)
Press - Sept. 16, 2008 - "Independent panel to study anthrax case"
New York Times - Sept. 17, 2008 - "Independent Review Set on F.B.I.
Washington Post - Sept. 17, 2008 - "FBI to Get Expert Help In Anthrax
News-Post - Sept. 17, 2008 - "Independent scientists to review evidence
against Ivins" (X)
Chicago Tribune (editorial) - Sept. 17, 2008 - "Anthrax killer, dead or
Today - Sept. 17, 2008 - "Senators question anthrax probe" (X)
Washington Post - Sept. 17, 2008 - "Lawmakers Question Results of
Press - Sept. 17, 2008 - "Leahy: Suspect had help in anthrax attacks"
San Francisco Chronicle - Sept. 18, 2008 - "Senator doubts anthrax
acted alone" (X)
Washington Post - Sept. 18, 2008 - "Anthrax Suspect Didn't Act Alone,
New York Times - Sept. 18, 2008 - "Senator, Target of Anthrax Letter,
F.B.I. Finding" (X)
Chemistry - Sept. 18, 2008 - "Tracing killer spores" (X)
Washington Post (editorial) - Sept. 19, 2008 - "Anthrax Suspicions"
American - Sept. 19, 2008 - "Seven Years Later: Electrons Unlocked
Anthrax Mail Mystery" (X)
Committee - Sept. 19, 2008 - "Responding to Hatfill, Locy presses court
to decide her case" (X)
News - Sept. 19, 2008 - "Leahy doubts FBI in anthrax case; scientist
Vegas Sun - Sept. 20, 2008 - "Overcoming anthrax doubts" (X)
New York Times - Sept. 24, 2008 - "Critics of Anthrax Inquiry Seek an
News-Post - Sept. 24, 2008 - "Ivins lost lab access in March after
Press - Sept. 24, 2008 - "Anthrax suspect was barred from labs after
- Sept. 24, 2008 - "‘New York Times’ Editors Are No Crime-Solvers"
Los Angeles Times - Sept. 24, 2008 - "Ivins claimed he knew who sent
Today - Sept. 24, 2008 - "FBI did not analyze anthrax from biodefense
Press - Sept. 24, 2008 - "Documents: Ivins bragged he knew anthrax
- Sept. 24, 2008 - " Suspect: 'I finally know who mailed the anthrax
Washington Post - Sept. 24, 2008 - "Ivins: 'I Know Who Mailed The
New York Times - Sept. 25, 2008 - "Anthrax-Case Affidavits Add to
Washington Post - Sept. 28, 2008 - "Two Portraits of a Bioterror
- Sept. 29, 2008 - "Silicon highlights remaining questions over anthrax
Newspapers - Sept. 30, 2008 - "FBI won't release details on anthrax
Press - Oct. 1, 2008 - "Legal troubles remain for reporter on anthrax
News- Post - Oct. 2, 2008 - "FBI outlines scope of anthrax study" (X)
Times of Trenton - Oct. 6, 2008 - "Pursue anthrax probe" (X)
Today - Oct. 6, 2008 - "FBI call on NAS to study anthrax case" (X)
Today - Oct. 12, 2008 - "White powder scares cost law enforcement time,
Review - Oct/Nov 2008 - "Trying Again" (X)
Press - Oct. 16, 2008 - "New lab security report may signal need for
Post - Oct. 27, 2008 - "Trail of Odd Anthrax Cells Led FBI to Army
- Oct. 29, 2008 - "Holt Asking Hard Questions About Anthrax" (X)
News-Post - Oct. 29, 2008 - "Detrick releases Ivins' personnel file"(X)
Press - Oct. 30, 2008 - "Fla. ruling will help widow's anthrax lawsuit"
World News - Oct. 30, 2008 - "Drum maker is treated for anthrax" (X)
New York Post - Nov. 2, 2008 - "Scientists Slam FBI 'Thrax Probe in Bid
to Clear Buddy 'Dr. Doom'" (X)
Journal - Nov. 3, 2008 - "Bioterrorism’s Deadly Math" (X)
Times - Nov. 3, 2008 - "Man dies in hospital from anthrax inhalation"
Digest - Nov. 10, 2008 - "Are We Safer Since 9/11?" (X)
Committee for Freedom of the Press - Nov. 12, 2008 - "Newspapers seek
of anthrax search records" (X)
Press - Nov. 12, 2008 - "Newspapers seek gov't documents in anthrax
Security Newswire - Nov. 13, 2008 - "Newspapers Pursue Anthrax Probe
on Hatfill" (X)
(Baltimore) Examiner - Nov. 16, 2008 - "Scientific impossibility: Did
get their man in Bruce Ivins?" (X)
Press - Nov. 17, 2008 - "Judge orders Hatfill search warrant made
Press - Nov. 17, 2008 - "Judges throws out contempt order against
Today (editorial) - Nov. 17, 2008 - "The real cost of fining a reporter"
(Baltimore) Examiner - Nov. 20, 2008 - "Costly program with a shady
(Baltimore) Examiner - Nov. 21, 2008 - "Md. lawmakers consider anthrax
investigation commission" (X)
Baltimore Examiner (editorial) - Nov. 23, 2008 - "Self (inflicted)
can up risk" (X)
Press - Nov. 25, 2008 - "Documents released in Hatfill anthrax case"(X)
New York Times - Nov. 25, 2008 - "New Details on F.B.I.’s False Start
Anthrax Case" (X)
- Nov. 25, 2008 - "Documents explain early FBI interest in Hatfill as
Angeles Times - Nov. 26, 2008 - "FBI's early anthrax hunches revealed
Washington Post - Nov. 26, 2008 - "In Anthrax Probe, Focus on Hatfill
Frederick News-Post - Nov. 26, 2008 - "Court unseals Hatfill anthrax
Washington Post - Nov. 30, 2008 - "Report Sounds Alarm Over Bioterror"
Press - Dec. 2, 2008 - "Security refresher ordered for Army labs" (X)
Frederick News-Post - Dec. 4, 2008 - "Detrick scientists receiving
biosecurity training" (X)
- Dec. 5, 2008 - "Commentary: WMD terrorism fears are overblown" (X)
- Dec. 10, 2008 - "Psychological Tests for Bioagent Researchers?" (X)
Press - Dec. 15, 2008 - "Court sides with NY Times in anthrax libel
New York Times - Dec. 15, 2008 - "Justices Reject Appeal in Anthrax
Committee - Dec. 15, 2008 - "Supreme Court won't hear Hatfill's libel
Press - Dec. 18, 2008 - "Military: Repeat of anthrax attacks harder
News-Post - Dec. 19, 2008 - "Security at military biolabs to get
- Dec. 22, 2008 - "Survey Reports Scientists 'Suspicious' Of FBI" (X)
2005-2008 by Ed Lake