Anthrax Killer: The Enemy Was Us

(The Nation)  This column was written by Robert Scheer.

---

The terrorists find all sorts of reasons to hate us. On Tuesday came word that the deadliest biological assault on the United States may be linked to the rejection of the terror suspect by a Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority sister decades ago. That is offered as an explanation of why the accused US Army bio-warfare scientist allegedly drove seven hours from his home to mail anthrax-laced letters from a mailbox near the sorority's Princeton University office, according to the Associated Press.

What we learned last week, after the suicide of Bruce E. Ivins, was disquieting enough without the twisted love angle. If you can believe the recent leaks from the FBI on its most important unsolved crime -- which killed five and sickened seventeen, immobilized the federal government and traumatized the nation -- it was a clean-shaven, white, God-fearing Catholic guy who done it. Despite a government anxious to find yet another example of Islamic terrorism in the wake of 9/11, it quickly became clear to experts that the anthrax used in the only WMD attack on our nation was a sophisticated product traceable to our own biological weapons labs. This is not surprising, because the United States has long been a leader in this field.

Our ostensible reason for developing the world's most sophisticated arsenal of deadly biological weapons is that the United States needs to learn how to prevent such attacks from deranged outsiders. Now we have yet another reminder that the enemy may be us, and that at least some of the folks who develop weapons like to find occasions to use them. In this case, the terrorist the FBI was about to charge with homicide was a nut case who nonetheless received the highest security clearance to work on the most dangerous of weapons deep within our own military-industrial complex.

This is yet another disappointment for those writing the basic Bush Administration narrative in which the terrorist is always some Islamo-fascist guy. That's the assigned role that Saddam Hussein failed at so miserably. Remember when New York Times reporter Judith Miller was breathlessly reporting every sighting of a rusting Iraqi RV as one of Hussein's biological weapons labs to justify the invasion of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Gosh, how the military-industrial complex must miss the Soviet Union, which could be trusted to match us in the high-tech game of dispensing mass death.

Of course, our government, which has never disowned the right to build and use nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, has long insisted that we alone are to be trusted with the creation of those devilish devices. Others are judged either too irrational, evil or merely incompetent to be allowed WMD, whereas we alone, with the unique experience of having killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, pose no threat. That others might not see it our way, particularly after recent incidents, such as the missing nukes that crossed the United States on that errant B-52 flight, or the anthrax attack allegedly conducted by one of our top bioweapons scientists, is understandable.

The larger problem is that we no longer take the threat of WMD as seriously as we should. We focused on the nonexistent WMD in Iraq while ignoring the spread of nuclear technology from Pakistan to North Korea, Iran and Libya under the guidance of A.Q. Khan, father of Pakistan's popularly revered "Islamic bomb." As former CIA Director George Tenet wrote in his memoir, the Bush Administration seized upon the WMD issue in Iraq only because it was convenient: "The United States did not go to war in Iraq solely because of WMD. In my view, I doubt it was even the principal cause. Yet it was the public face that was put on it."

The public face of terrorism was a bearded Muslim armed with WMD. No wonder we were caught off guard when the only person to ever attack us with WMD turns out to be, apparently, an active congregant at St. John the Evangelist Church in Frederick, Maryland, and a highly trusted employee of the US military.

Not that our sleuths weren't forewarned. As Ivins' therapist, social worker Jean Duley, reported to the Maryland District Court last month in a hearing to obtain a restraining order: "As far back as the year 2000, the respondent has actually attempted to murder several other people.... he is a revenge killer when he feels that he's been slighted... especially towards women.... He has been forensically diagnosed by several top psychiatrists as a sociopathic, homicidal killer."

In any case, he was one of us.
By Robert Scheer
Reprinted with permission from The Nation

[txgrouch2006]

This was NOT a one-man job.

Scientists say there''s no way anyone could have produced this much powder form anthrax in secret. It would have been a MASSIVE AND CONSPICUOUS effort. And it DID OCCUR somewhere. Where?

It required cooperation of lab management to set up a secret lab for such a massive effort. And lab management, not a lab scientist, would have been motivated by increased funding from a public scare.

One deranged scientist could not have done this alone. Whether Ivins was involved or not, he COULD NOT have acted alone.

[ediso74]

Another low for CBS News, allowing an incoherent rant against the US government to appear under the pretext of reporting on the government''s finding that a US military researcher was responsible for the anthrax attack.

While I am not a fan of Bush nor of the Iraq war, I am appalled that CBS allowed this to appear. Two references to ''military-industrial complex'', ''Our ostensible reason for developing the world''s most sophisticated arsenal of deadly biological weapons'' implying sinister ulterior motives by the US government, ''we alone, with the unique experience of having killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki,'' again damning the US, ''Of course, our government, which has never disowned the right to build and use nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, has long insisted that we alone are to be trusted with the creation of those devilish devices'' - which is not true -, all point this article''s real intent to be a polemic against the US government.

Particular galling, is the use of ''slam dunk'' CIA Director George Tenet''s quote - he was Director while the justification for the invasion was built - to condemn Bush''s justifications. Don''t use the words of one of the architects of the invasion from his self-serving book.

Does CBS really hate the US so much ?

Now there is irony in the fact that a US citizen is now thought to be behind the attack, but that was not the intent of this article.

[extremophil]

The enemy was.....us? I''m so ashamed. I hate myself....(sniff)

[txgrouch2006]

He probably didn''''t do it in secret. I suspect he did it in his government provided lab using taxpayer provided resources.
Posted by pdchapin at 10:18 AM : Aug 08, 2008

That was my point. WHO gave him the "government provided lab using taxpayer provided resources" WITHOUT ANY OF THE OTHER SCIENTISTS NOTICING???

Nobody saw Ivins making the powder form anthrax. All scientists agree it would have been a large undertaking that would have been very conspicuous. But nobody else in the lab saw him doing it.

ONLY LAB MANAGEMENT could have provided the hidden lab for Ivins, OR ANYONE ELSE to make the stuff.

[pdchapin]

This was NOT a one-man job.

Scientists say there''''s no way anyone could have produced this much powder form anthrax in secret.

Posted by txgrouch2006 at 09:58 AM : Aug 08, 2008

He probably didn''t do it in secret. I suspect he did it in his government provided lab using taxpayer provided resources. The problem is containing something this small when the criminal is one of the people cleared for access.

[txgrouch2006]

This was NOT a one-man job.

Scientists say there''s no way anyone could have produced this much powder form anthrax in secret.

But someone did. It required cooperation of lab management to set up a secret lab to make the stuff. And lab management, not a lab scientist, would have been motivated by increased funding from a public scare.

One deranged scientist could not have done this alone. Whether Ivins was involved or not, he COULD NOT have acted alone.

[dashortround]

"...it was a clean-shaven, white, God-fearing Catholic guy who done it."


There are surely plenty more just like him, right here among us, right now. And there always will be, regardless of what we do.

There really is no such thing as "absolute safety" and there never will be - that''s just an illusion. Get used to the idea, get over it, and get on with your life. Worrying about it is just a waste of time.

[rayuk-2009]

It is not uncommon for scientist such as Ivins to be a little strange. These folks, in some cases, may appear almost child like. Why did it take so long to identify this individual when all the signs were there for years?

[jmurrieta1]

Next--a "deranged" scientist from Livermore National Laboratory sets off a plutonium bomb.

Close to the election?

[lawyertom1]

Given the quality of the anthrax, it was speculated shortly after the "attack" that it was an inhouse job. Admittedly the WH tried to lie its way into blaming Iraq/Sadam, but those who have dealt with issues of this type knew that at least one serious possibility was one of ours. No real surprise here, but it sure took the FBI forever to figure it out. Kind of like they missed 9/11.