FBI Anthrax Case:Paid Witnesses? “New” DNA Test?

by Scott Creighton

****UPDATE**** Class Action Lawsuit: American People VS FBI 

In a stunning development, it is being reported by several news organizations that Dr. Ivins told a friend that at some point during the investigation the FBI offered $2.5 million and “a sports car of his choosing” to his son for info that could be used to implicate his father in the anthrax killings. Was he the only witness offered money to come forward?

I have also learned that this “new DNA” test that connected this strain of anthrax to the lab Dr. Ivins worked in, took place in early 2002. So why are we being told that if they had it 3 years ago, Hatfill wouldn’t have been charged?

Some kind of new evidence is bound to be forthcoming today (unless some big news event breaks and takes all the attention away from this case, like say, when Donald Rumsfeld announced on Sept. 10th 2001 that 2 trillion was “missing” from the Pentagon) because they are supposedly briefing the victims families about the case this morning.

So that gives me a brief window of opportunity to explore a little more of the “evidence” that has been leaked by the investigators so far.

Paid Witnesses

Cruising through the news cycles now is the reported story that, according to a friend of Dr. Ivins, Ivins complained to him awhile ago that the FBI was so aggressive in their persuit of him, “they offered his son $2.5 million to rat him out and tried to turn his hospitalized daughter against him with photographs of dead anthrax victims.” CBS

In the current case, Ivins complained privately that FBI agents had offered his son, Andy, $2.5 million, plus “the sports car of his choice” late last year if he would turn over evidence implicating his father in the anthrax attacks, according to a former U.S. scientist who described himself as a friend of Ivins.CBS.

If this statement is found to be accurate (at this point no-one, including Jean Duley, has even implied that Dr. Bruce Ivins was a liar) then that is a huge development in this case. Because it means that someone on the FBI’s investigative team was so desperate to pin this on Ivins that they would offer huge sums of tax-payer money to ANY witness for ANY information.

Once impropriety is exposed in one part of an investigation, as long as the investigator that committed it is still on the team, you HAVE to question all the other parts of that investigation. Meaning; if they offered cash to one witness to step forward, then it follows that it is possible that they offered that same cash to another witness.

During the Aug. 2nd press interview that Jean Duley’s boyfriend, Mike McFadden, gave, he admitted that Duleyhad been talking with the FBI for awhile.

Duley had numerous meetings withthe FBI in the past month, McFadden said, but he declined to provide specific information about those meetings.” Fredrick News Post.

According to the timelinethat his statement creates, that means the FBI was in communications with Duley BEFORE she reported Dr. Ivins strange group therapy rant on the 9th of July. This is VERY important because it sets up the FBI’s case that Ivins has a history of mental illness as well as the restraining order that Duley files later on the 24th.

But then the interview takes a strange turn. Out of nowhere McFadden claims that “”She had to quit her job and is now unable to work, and we have spent our savings on attorneys.”. Others have already done a fantastic job of picking this comment apart, so I won’t waste your time withthe obvious problems with his comment. But I will ask this: why is McFadden introducing the idea of Duley’s financial sacrifice at this point?

He would even go further with this theme: “She sacrificed all this stuff because she wanted to do the right thing.” . FNP.

Sounds to me like someone is justifying something, now doesn’t it?

Look, we now know that the FBI wasn’t opposed to paying witnesses huge sums of cash for their testimony in this case. That being said, lets look at the facts. The FBI was in contact with Duley BEFORE she called the cops about the July 9th rant; The FBI, according to Duley’s audio testimony, told Duley to file the restraining order; and according to Duley’s statements, the FBI prepped her by sharing case file information with her, as a witness, so that she would include that information in the court records, without having that information vetted or scrutinized by the courts; and now we know that the FBI in this case, wasn’t above paying cash to get witnesses to help.

Conclusion: Was Jean Duley paid millions to help set up Dr. Ivins? That may be the case. We need to look into her financial background to see if she has come into a windfall of some kind since she was in contact with the FBI.

Paying a witness to testify is one thing; but paying someone to file fraudulent claims in court and to make false statements to the police, is quite another. By ALL accounts thus far, Jean Duley’s comments are the exception to every stated opinion of this man and, at the same time, they are the basis for EVERY legal action taken against him that seems to set up the FBI’scase. It is illegal for the FBI to pay a person to file fraudulent claims with any official agency and it is equally illegal for someone to accept payment to do so. 

For these reasons there should be a serious investigation into the actions taken by the FBI investigative team and Jean Duley’s financial records.

New DNA Test

 On this past Sunday, the story broke that the FBI had “new DNA evidence” that would link this strain of anthrax to Dr. Ivins lab.

This story got allot of traction for a few days, until it was uncovered by many that the DNA evidence linked to a sample that many people in the lab had access to, and that it still wasn’t, at that time, in it’s weaponized form; a process that many of his fellow scientists say he was just incapable of doing.

According to the New York Sun: “Using new genome technology, researchers looked at samples of cells from the victims to identify the kind of anthrax Ames strain that killed them, the scientist said. They noticed very subtle differences in the DNA of the strain used in the attacks than in other types of Ames anthrax.”  NYS.

The New York Sun goes on to say: “The science is known as DNA fingerprinting. Although any two samples of anthrax bacteria will likely share roughly the same DNA structure, there are tiny differences from sample to sample.” NYS.

The new genome technology that tracked down Ivins was either not available or too expensive to use often until about three years ago.“  NYS.

Really?

From an article from New Scientist dated May 9th 2002;

The DNA sequence of the anthrax sent through the US mail in 2001 has been revealed and confirms suspicions that the bacteria originally came from a US military laboratory.”

The data released uses codenames for the reference strains against which the attack strain was compared. But New Scientist can reveal that the two reference strains that appear identical to the attack strain most likely originated at the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick(USAMRIID), Maryland.

The new genetic sequencing work was done by the Institute for Genomic Research in Rockville, Maryland (TIGR), and Paul Keim’s team at the University of Northern Arizona at Flagstaff.

The idea was to tease out subtle differences between the two genomes that might identify the source of the attack strain…” New Scientist.

Notice the similar hot-points from the articles. This is the same “evidence” they had since early 2002, but because it didn’t get much attention, they picked it up and dusted it off as if it was something new pointing to Dr. Ivins. But we know that all it pointed to was the Ames strain of anthrax at the lab. Well, apparently they knew that back in 2002.

So, the FBI’s “new DNA evidence” and the reason they started looking at Dr. Ivins for this? I don’t think so. This story get’s worse and worse by the minute.

Someone from the local or state-level investigations units in Maryland needs to step in and take over this investigation, or there needs to be a congressional hearing on the level of the 9/11 commission. We know that the FBI has botched the investigation from the beginning and now, we are being spoon fed misleading evidence from the FBI team.

The FBI’s Keystone Cops production is embarrassing. They tend to forget that they are supposed to be trying to find the ‘terrorist” that used OUR ANTHRAX to kill civilians and to attack MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. What makes the FBI so sure that there won’t be another attack while they are framing the second guy for this?

This is deeply serious, and unless the congress wants the citizens of this country to know that our government is either completely inept or actually protecting the terrorists who sent the anthrax, then they need to step in and take the FBI off this case now.

48 Responses

  1. [...] Scott Creighton American Everyman August 6, 2008 [...]

  2. [...] Posted in CONSPIRACY, POLITICS, TRUTH, you can’ make this stuff up by bwt on August 6th, 2008 Scott Creighton American Everyman August 6, [...]

  3. Guess that is what Dr. Ivins’s son was referring to when he said at his father’s grave… ‘It’s all over now.’… all the harassment and intimidation is over…. doesn’t mean he was a coward… no way…. He had been harassed for 7 years, along with all the other scientists at the lab and after Hatfill was awarded ‘damages’, the FBI bombarded Ivins with extra zeal…. can you imagine going to the hospital and trying to bully a person’s sick daughter?

  4. You’re amazing! You’re the best reading on this matter anywhere. It’s very good to know there is at least one sane person out there. And it’s even better that you’re such a gifted writer! Thanks much.

  5. Hey Scott, I’m glad I found you at OEN a few weeks ago on a 9/11 subject. Great work on this Anthrax case.

    How much did Ms. Duley make, I wonder? She had just completed 90 days of home detention when she became Ivins’ “theripist.” I understand Maryland has a “3 strikes & you’re out” stipulation for DUIs. She filed Chapter 7 in 1999. Well – anyways … here’s an enlightening WaPo story from 1999:

    The 1999 Jean Wittman [Duley]

    …But Wolf, 42, a former Army rifle instructor now studying toward a PhD in counseling psychology, and co-organizer Jean Wittman, 36, whose life took her from Chevy Chase, where she started drinking at age 10, to a Florida motorcycle gang …

    “This is a work of God,” a parched and sunburned Wittman said happily yesterday, as the fairgrounds exhibit hall began to fill up with gleaming custom Harleys.

    …”Once a biker always a biker,” said Wittman, now of Frederick, who said she has lived the lifestyle for two decades, much of the time heavily involved in substance abuse.

    “You name it, I did it,” she said. “Heroin. Cocaine. PCP. The whole nine yards. In 1993, I hit a bottom. I woke up out of blackout in Southeast lockup in D.C. and didn’t know how I had gotten there. . . . I had a spiritual awakening.”

    She vowed to chuck her addictions. But she cherished the lifestyle.[more]

  6. PS – Alex Constantine has been following lots and lots of leads here.

  7. Just curious, why is my first comment being moderated?

  8. It’s finished. the officials have decided that all the ‘evidence’ points to Dr. Ivins and the case is closed.
    so there you have it….. The cake is baked… it has risen but the dough is still raw inside…. it’s a mess but it’s out of the oven and on the table…. no one wants any part of it…

  9. Smoking Gun has a bunch of documents up now.

  10. check the maryland database. michael d. mcfadden of williamsport (and i believe i remember a newstory stated they were living in williamsport) has had a few problems. money problems resulting in court cases. is this the same guy? if so, between the two of them, lots of problems.

  11. Well, my first comment is still awaiting moderation, but I wanted to share the link with you guys:

    Jean Wittman [Duley] in 1999

    This is a WaPo article on her previous serious drug & alcohol addiction.

  12. The “theripist” stated in court that Ivins was “forensically diagnosed” as basically a murderous psycho.

    “Forensically” means Ivins wasn’t anywhere near them when they made that diagnosis. They never met him, never knew him. Nada.

    Let me make a reasonable guess as to how she came to use the word “forensically”: the FBI agent who encouraged her to get the restraining order (if not put her up to it, heck, who knows, maybe he drove her there, she had a DUI, right?), anyway, he fed her the official psychological profile of the Anthrax Killer that had been done up by real psychiatrists in the aftermath of the deadly attack. Then he attributed that forensic diagnosis to Ivins and that’s why she says fully awkward things like “he is a revenge killer”… really? What was her flat out proof that he had ever killed anyone?

    She was told by someone that Ivins was the guy and then she smeared him in court with the “forensic diagnosis” of the anthrax killer, not of Ivins, but of whoever that killer might be. What was said about Ivins may have been based on a total smear that had nothing to do with anything real. And that fits in with reports that the FBI wasn’t suggesting to the people around Ivins that he was under investigation, they were telling people he was the killer. That is outrageous. Can you imagine how psychologically damaging it is to have authority figures tell all your neighbors, your family, that you are a killer, not a suspect, but the genuine article? That must have been pure Hell.

    Civil lawyers should be falling all over themselves to get to the Ivins family and represent them.

  13. Gerald Posner on Keith Olbermann is refuting the FBI’s claims that Ivins is the guy. Good stuff.

  14. [...] Can you say scapegoat? Posted on August 7, 2008 by paxcosmico Read the amazing piece by Scott Creigton on the Anthrax case here [...]

  15. Kira… your first comment is still waiting on Wilyloman; I think he is still at work ……

    All of you have great comments here; I hope it gives some comfort to Dr. Ivins’ family to know that most people are not fooled by the hoop-a-la put out by the FBI and that twerp of a woman. I can’t even bear to repeat her name….

    BenFranklin… you are right… lawyers should be all over this …..

  16. Scott Humphrey…. where are you? Are you OK?

  17. Thanks, Jan :)

    My short comments are making it through.

    Could it be the word count that’s holding up my first comment? It has 2 links – would that do it? Just curious for future reference.

  18. Kira…. I don’t know….I read the articles and comments like everyone else…. I believe you might be right though… willyloman might have it set up to preview certain types of comments and then maybe it is Word Press that prefers for him to review them……… sorry you are having to wait….

  19. And, just an aside re:Posner – last night he stated that [if I remember correctly] the FBI DID have proof that Ivins was in NJ at the time of the mailings, which is INCORRECT.

    I’ve never liked Posner – but he did make some good points tonight.

  20. OK – Meryl Nass is going over some of the main points at her blog.

    Thanks again, Jan! :wave:

  21. The FBI expended so much energy setting this guy up, when they could have been finding the real perpetrator.

    Amazing…

    I wonder why Ivins didn’t go public with the FBI harassment?

  22. Im here Jan. I been here all along, off n on since 2:00pm. Im just too pissed. Shooked, I don’t know. Im here, but im trying to chill out. Numb,,,,thats what I am.

  23. Scott, me too…. knew you would be upset…. guess everyone is ….. be glad when Willyloman gets back… worried about his response…..
    going to bed…. been a long depressing day….
    take it easy…. glad to hear from you…..

  24. Ok, I’ve probably double-submitted comments. Neither one showed up when it hit the publish button.

    Hope all is well out there …

  25. That one showed up … where are my other ones? Frustrated.

  26. Certainly the IVANS family should pursue a civil action against the FBI.
    I beleive “circumstantial” evidence, which the FBI spokesperson stated yesterday, was predominantly all the evidence type they actually possess.
    Ofcourse, they (FBI) are free to say, as they also stated yesterday, that they could have acquired a CONVICTION on the basis of this circumstantial evidence. After their suspect escaped from this planet, the FBI realized they would never have to have their bogus theories tested in a criminal proceding but they still needed to get some sort of vindication, so they leaked certain aspects of their alledged case against IVANS, and had their case tried in the NATIONAL MEDIA owned and controled by, well, we know who. SO, in that situation, they had to assume they could MAKE THEIR PRESUMPTIVE CLAIMS WITH LITTLE ACCOUNTIBILLITY.

    To be objective, I state the following. It could very well be that BRUCE IVANS was, in fact,responsible for the 01 anthrax attacks. The FBI is certainly entitled to make their claims against this suspect, and honestly, on the basis of these claims made by the FBI, IVANS IS now a SUSPECT. Thats what the FBI is suppose to do, CHARGE SUSPECTS WITH CRIMINAL ACT’S. THATS WHAT WE PAY THEM TO DO!.

    There is a PAST PRESIDENT SETTING CASE. It was a 4TH AMENDENT challange to the conduct of police officers in search warrant affidavits produced (by p/o’s) to acquire search warrants. I’ts called “FRANKS vs DELAWARE”.
    Defendent Franks challanged the integrity of the information in a s/w affidavit used to acquire a s/w of his premisis. The basic ruling of the Justice’s decision was, that a defendet may challange sworn statements contained in s/w affidavit. The reason? To determine whether or not the police put known false statements in their s/w affidavits, that they should have reasonabley known to be false, Or did in fact know was false thereby acting in total wreckless disregard of the truth. If the FBI was Issued s/w’s, then there is deffinately s/w affidavits in a file from the issueing AUTHORITY. There may be multible issueiances of s/w’s. Im not honestly sure how this process works at the federal level. But I am sure that if there are s/w’s issued relivant to IVANS, Then therefore there are certainly s/w affidavits in the possession of the issueing authority.
    It’s a 14th Amendent(due process) connection back to the 4th Amendent.
    Any private property that the FBI searched relivant to their IVANS case,
    they therefore had to get a s/w. And in order to get a s/w, they had to construct a s/w affidavit, submitted on behalf of their request for issueiance for a s/w, outlining what ever probable cause there was showning legal justification to conduct search of private property. These s/w affidavits are a matter of public record. I honest don’t know if the FBI needed a s/w to search US Government owned property (public owned property) (IE. Ft Detrick property-USPS property etc) BUT IF THEY SEARCHED ANY PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEN THERE IS A PUBLIC RECORD PAPER TRAIL.

    I suppose now, the FBI thinks, hopes, this is now to be the end of the anthrax attack case, that it will now fade off into the sunset and THIS CASE WILL FADE OUT, IF WE ALLOW THAT.

    This case must be kept alive, and moving forward to a PROPPER CONCLUSION, not one in favor of how it stands at this moment. We have only heard from one side of this case. Thats not how it works. Nationally, we have not yet heard any defense statements. We’ve not had object opportunity to fully examine the governments evidence they claimed yesterday, whould result in conviction of their suspect. But who can be trusted to examine the governments evidence against IVANS? I would not trust any living person associated with the federal government. NOONE! Sorry, they have no reliable credibillity with me. So there is a serious problem.

    We need to hear from the Ivans side of these criminal charges. We need to examine the governments evidence. Both sides of this dispute needs to be totally objective. After all, it could very well be, that BRUCE IVANS is in fact the guilty party. THIS CASE NEEDS TO BE TRIED, AND ACTUALLY, WE DON’T NEED THE SUSPECT TO BE PRESENT IN ANY COURTROOM TO TRY THE GOVERNMENTS CASE. AND IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THE EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATES GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, THE SUSPECT IS DEAD, AND WE ADVOID THE EXPENSE OF LENGTHY INCARCERATION AND SUBSEQUENT EXICUTION.

    But, if the evidence fails to show guilt, WELL THEN, NOW WE GOTTA A SITUATION HERE. AND THAT WILL CALL FOR YET, FURTHER VINDICATION.

    IF THERE IS ANYONE IN DOUBT ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN LOST HERE IN CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS, GO BRUSH UP IN “RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED”.
    And no where is it ststed that these rights are forfited upon the untimely death of the accused.

  27. TO KIRA,
    I DON’T KNOW IF YOUR WERE AWARE OF THIS OR NOT, BUT EVERY THING STATED HERE ON THIS SITE, IS PROCESSED THROUGH THE F B I AS WELL AS THE OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY DOMESTIC TERRORISM HIT SQUADRON. THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT WHAT EVER YOU SAID, WAS A THREAT, SO THEY BLEEPED IT OUT. SO NOW WHEN YOU GO OUT, WATCH OUT FOR PLAIN WHITE MONTE CARLOS, PLAIN WHT OR BLK DODGE CHARGERS R/T’S, (THEY LIKE THOSE) OR BLACK CROWN VICTORIAS.

  28. There was a movie about thirty years ago with ron howard who with his girlfriend, they stole her daddys rolls royce and headed to vegas. the father hired this detective agency and they all headed out is these big dodge fury III’s. at some point there was a meetting in the desert and the chief looks at his guys, all in white shirts and ties, hats, and dark glasses, and he says to them “YOUR A GOOD BUNCH OF MEN!” I always think of this when i think of the FBI.

  29. Heh, Scott H. – guess I’m on the right track, eh? [This time I'm not going to use html in case, we'll see if this comment will post.]

    Hatfill still smells to me. What better way to protect than to “exonerate.”

    Take a gander at this long ‘03 WaPo article:

    The Pursuit of Hatfill
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A49717-2003Sep9?language=printer

    American Prospect article:
    http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=who_is_steven_hatfill

    Quote:
    On Capitol Hill, weeks after the scare over the initial Daschle letter had abated, a second letter appeared in Daschle’s office. This one had passed through irradiation equipment to kill anthrax spores, and the powdery material packed in the envelope tested benign.

    The most curious thing was the letter’s postmark. It had been mailed in mid-November from London. The FBI knew that Hatfill had been in Swindon, England — about 70 miles from London — at that time for specialized training to become a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. Agents determined through rental car receipts that he was the only trainee to hire a car, telling others that he planned to visit old friends. The FBI asked British police to help retrace his every move. ~~~more at link~~~

  30. I give up. I decided not to use html in my last comment to see if it would post. It did, but now is in the infernal “Your comment is awaiting moderation” bin along with my first ever comment here which is still waiting.

    Is there an email addy for Scott Creighton so I might get “clearance?”

    I still think Hatfill SMELLS.

  31. Heh, Scott H. – guess I’m on the right track, eh?

    Message in the Anthrax
    http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/Bioter/messageanthrax.html

  32. American Prospect article:
    http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=who_is_steven_hatfill

    Quote:
    On Capitol Hill, weeks after the scare over the initial Daschle letter had abated, a second letter appeared in Daschle’s office. This one had passed through irradiation equipment to kill anthrax spores, and the powdery material packed in the envelope tested benign.

    The most curious thing was the letter’s postmark. It had been mailed in mid-November from London. The FBI knew that Hatfill had been in Swindon, England — about 70 miles from London — at that time for specialized training to become a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq. Agents determined through rental car receipts that he was the only trainee to hire a car, telling others that he planned to visit old friends. The FBI asked British police to help retrace his every move. ~~~more at link~~~

  33. Willyloman will be back tomorrow…. morning. He’ll check Kira’s comments to see if they came through and if they did … why they won’t post on their own.

    Scott, you are so right… they have to try this case and clear Dr. Ivins’ name.

  34. Thank you again, Jan! I’m just so angry with what’s going on in our country – and have been for more than a decade, now.

    Here’s one of Gandhi’s sites with another very disturbing story:
    http://ridingthejuggernaut.blogspot.com/

    “Things Are Getting Very Wierd Very Quickly
    Holy shit. A friend just sent me this news from Mike Whitney:

    My friend Tom Feeley is in Big trouble. He runs the web site informationclearinghouse.info which updates ‘news you won’t find in the corporate media’ every day. The site is strongly anti-war.

    Tom has gotten his share of death threats over the years, but what happened this week is a lot more serious.”

  35. Hah! Am I learning how to game WordPress?

  36. Hey Kira, yeah… you are doing fine, except you leave hints at ‘trouble’ but do not transfer any information… guess you want us to visit your friend’s blog…. I’m heading there now. who would send death threats? the internet is full of people writing about stuff not on the regular news..

  37. Hi Jan. I’ve been doing this since early 2004 – that is keeping my eyes glued to my computer screen and researching the criminal cabal. I found this site just a few weeks ago at OEN through a posting by Scott Creighton re:9/11. That subject is the linchpin as far as I’m concerned and I agree with Scott on most things. That is why I’m here.

    There are certain blogs that are trustworthy IMHO, of course. Gandhi is one. He has followed the story for years. I trust him implicitly. Another blogger I trust implicitly is http://www.winterpatriot.blogspot.com If you need or want info that connects the dots under the radar – go there.

    InformationClearingHouse.com has been one of the sites we could go during the most serious info blackout from ‘04 onward to get stories that fell under M$M reporting. It’s disturbing to me that Tom Feeley is being accosted by … ?men in black? … and threatened!!!

    The internet is the next thing to undergo a 9/11 type attack — they call it “i-9/11.” This is the best thing we’ve got right now to keep the truth alive.

  38. And Jan – I didn’t mean just to leave “hints.” Several of my posts have not made it through, so I’m trying to shorten them, otherwise I would have pasted more.

    I’m certainly not trying to make you go to a certain site. I’m only adding links for people who are interested.

  39. No problem KIRA…. I like to visit other sites ..especially good ones. I went to juggernault and read about Toms’ scary problem….. he has a lot of good articles posted but like you said…. nothing that has not been talked about on other blogs. I didn’t read them all… must be something on his blog that no one else has….
    So the ‘i’ stands for internet….. a i-9/11 …
    well, one thing is going around and it is dangerous. that virus that Willyloman was warning everyone about… it seems to be popping up on many various sites… it you see it pop up… immediately cut your computer off .. in fact it may be wise to download the ‘cure’ for it before you get contaminated by it. He had to use a separate computer to get the cure….. go to ex-antivirus08 on your google and download the fix for it … it says that it is for 2008 and 2009 version and it works on both. I think you need to make copies of the instructions also. If a lot of people get contaminated, and can’t get to the cure….. a lot of cumputers will end up in the trash. it virtually takes over your computer. It shows up as a pop up ad that says somethng about being a virus protection. If you even click the close on it , it starts downloading. That’s why you have to cut your computer off.
    anyway, didn’t mean to get into all that. Hope Tom will be alright….. He should get a stalker court order out against those people… maybe take pictures of these men who are harrassing him…… sounds so scary…. threatening his family too… sounds like what they did to Bruce Ivins.
    Can he hire a private investigator to find out who they are?

  40. Kira… I meant to say that I went to informationclearinghouse and to juggernault… enjoyed both…

  41. POSTER BEN FRANKLIN ( #11 ABOVE ) HAS AN INTERRESTING THEORY ON STATEMENTS JEAN DULEY MADE SEE HIS THIRD PARAGRAPH LINE 6. AGAIN, IT’S A RATIONAL THEORY, AND IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE.

    Kira, you realize I was just playin with ya, about the stuff I said earlier today about the hit squad, dodge charger R/T (they like that one)
    fact is, the humor I transmit is purportionate to the stress im feelin from all the crap we deal with here. this is the crap channel, where we all come to to get all pissed off and stressed out. From my point of view, or rather, my not so humble oppinion is that our federal government has reached sufficient levels of immoral and illegal conduct requireing a citizen response at a higher level of assertiveness than what is and has been employed, to date, which, to me, aint gittin us nowhere. but I think Willy has promised me he’ll tell me when it’s time to play cowboys and indians, but till then, I think im supposed to be chillin out.

    SO, Kira, ya got any JUMPER CABLES? (serious question)

    Ohh, incidently, my name is Scott Humphrey, im in SPRINGFIELD ILLINOIS.

    AT YOUR SERVICE MAMM

  42. I am getting so tired of the press saying Bruce Ivins was acting peculiar for ‘years’ without adding that for years he and other lab associates had been harrassed by thE FBI. Guess his lab co-workers are relieved that the pressure is off them…
    makes you wonder….
    Since they claim they have ended the case, maybe they have put aside their future amthrax attacks… it would really throw a wrench into their Ivins’ web.

  43. About time,Scott…. and next time, leave a note letting ‘Mom’ know you are out playing…. too many boogeymen walking the streets now… have to look out for each other. Especially ones that hunt dumsters for jumper cables. and if you really want to know….. we missed your ‘LOUD and sharp’ comments.

  44. Well, I had to think. sometimes, one can absorb more knowledge, by keeping ones mouth shut, and that is what I was doin.

  45. Who stood to gain? Please note those attacked Intended to stop the Patriot Act!

Leave a Reply