Serious doubt cast on FBI's anthrax case against Bruce Ivins

That there's so much lingering doubt about who was responsible for this indescribably consequential attack is astonishing, and it ought to be unacceptable. Full Story »

Posted by Jon Mitchell - via Salon , Umbreen Bhatti (t)

See All Reviews »

Review

Randy Morrow
4.1
by Randy Morrow - Feb. 16, 2011

From the start, it was obvious that the FBI’s case against Ivins was barely more persuasive than its case against Hatfill had been. The allegations were entirely circumstantial; there was no direct evidence tying Ivins to the mailings; and there were huge, glaring holes in both the FBI’s evidentiary and scientific claims. —- The report, commissioned by the FBI, specifically concluded that “the scientific link between the letter material and [Ivins’] flask number RMR-1029 is not as conclusive as stated in the DOJ Investigative Summary.” —- It is hard to overstate the political significance of the anthrax attacks. For reasons I’ve described at length, that event played at least as much of a role as the 9/11 attacks in elevating the Terrorism fear levels which, through today, sustain endless wars, massive defense and homeland security budgets, and relentless civil liberties erosions.

Mr. Greenwald expounds on a report that casts “serious doubt” on their second suspect (the one that was supposed to be the—no this time we got him guy) in the anthrax attacks.

See All Reviews »

Randy's Rating

Overall
4.1

Good
from 11 answers
Quality
4.2
Information
4.0
Insight
5.0
Style
4.0
Context
4.0
Expertise
5.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
3.0
Responsibility
4.0
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
3.0
Credibility
5.0
More How our ratings work »