web analytics

WHEN SCIENCE GOES MAD…

By ATWadmin On August 2nd, 2008

Did you see that a  top US government scientist who helped to investigate America’s deadly 2001 anthrax attacks has killed himself just as he was about to be charged in the case, in an extraordinary and unexpected twist to the biggest criminal investigation in US history.  Bruce Ivins, 62, who had worked for 18 years at the US Government’s biodefence research laboratory in Fort Detrick, Maryland, died from an overdose of painkillers after being told that the Justice Department was about to charge him over the attacks, which brought fresh terror to the US days after the September 11 atrocity.


Spore-laden letters were posted on September 18 and October 9, 2001, to media organisations in New York and Florida and to the offices of Tom Daschle, then the Senate Democratic leader, and a colleague, Senator Patrick Leahy, of Vermont.


One of the five people killed was Bob Stevens, a British picture editor from Berkshire who worked in Boca Raton, Florida. Two postal workers, a New York hospital worker and an elderly woman in Connecticut also died. The Senate, House of Representatives and the Supreme Court building were shut down.


The original mad scientist?

16 Responses to “WHEN SCIENCE GOES MAD…”

  1. If he was guilty I hope he rots.

  2. Shades of Dr David Kelly, very convenient ‘death’

  3. "If he was guilty I hope he rots."

    Since the guy’s dead MAHONS I think the possibility of hin ROTTING is highly likely.

    Unless, of course, they have him cremated

  4. I read some interesting stuff about this guy on the smoking gun. Apparently a woman was getting ready to get a court order against this guy for stalking, threatening and harassing her. He also had a long history of crazy behavior. This was not in any news reports that I saw about the guy. He was a total whack, apparently.

    After what the FBI did to that guy who DIDN’T commit the anthrax attacks, I was quite skeptical about the allegations being made against this guy at first. I don’t think that he was conveniently and suspiciously offed by the gov’t (as Jon Gregory implies), I think he was just plumb crazy and therefore capable of doing the deed that he is suspected of doing.

  5. Spore-laden letters were posted on September 18 and October 9, 2001, to media organisations in New York and Florida and to the offices of Tom Daschle, then the Senate Democratic leader, and a colleague, Senator Patrick Leahy, of Vermont.

    The targets are worth a second glance. Both (Democratic) political targets were roadblocks to the PATRIOT Act. For such a ‘whack job’ he choose well.

    Its all a bit Dr David Kelly for me.

  6. its a conspiracy………he never dunnit.
    Just like Barry George if your nuts then your guilty.
    Its never the regular guys cos they don’t do that stuff. I should be a detective.
    Was David Kelly a nut?

  7. Allan, what religion was this guy?

  8. I have yet to see a good story on this guys motive.

  9. Frank his religion was Global Warming

  10. His religion was ‘patsy’

  11. "The targets are worth a second glance. Both (Democratic) political targets were roadblocks to the PATRIOT Act."

    So let me get this right, because Daschle and Leahy were potential obstacles to the Patriot Act, someone inside the government decided to target them thus instantly raising their personal anti-terrorist credentials?

  12. I blame the mercury fillings in his teeth….

  13. So let me get this right, because Daschle and Leahy were potential obstacles to the Patriot Act, someone inside the government decided to target them thus instantly raising their personal anti-terrorist credentials?

    The State possibly. The Government need have nothing to do with it. Either way, the PATRIOT Act sailed through shortly after this rather conveniently timed event, with no committee hearings or floor debate.

    Congressman Barney Frank (D) says, “This was the least democratic process for debating questions fundamental to democracy I have ever seen. A bill drafted by a handful of people in secret, subject to no committee process, comes before us immune from amendment.” [Village Voice, 11/9/2001] Only 66 congresspeople, and one senator, Russell Feingold (D), vote against it. Few in Congress are able to read summaries, let alone the fine print, before voting on it. [Los Angeles Times, 10/30/2001] Feingold says, “The new law goes into a lot of areas that have nothing to do with terrorism and have a lot to do with the government and the FBI having a wish list of things they want to do.”

  14. Eddie: Thank you but it was shorthand for the expression that he rot in Hell.

  15. Here’s an interesting roundup of the evidence against him.

    It does seem pretty thin.

  16. Nice link Frank. Another ‘Deep State’ event sure to fall into the memory hole.