Sunday, October 30, 2011

Oct. 30 - Nov. 5, 2001 discussions

The first comment I made this week was about how the in-out logs clearly show that Ivins was making spore powders in his lab during evenings from August 31 to September 16, 2001. On the 17th he drove to New Jersey to mail the media letters. From the 18th through the 27th, he was waiting for the media letters to be delivered and to create panic.

When the media letters had NO effect, Ivins returned to his BSL-3 lab again on the 28th and started making the spore powders for the senate letters. He continued doing that through the 5th.

On the 6th, Ivins suddenly had no further reason to go into his BSL-3 lab again. He was evidently just waiting for the senate letters to be delivered and to have their effect. He didn't work long hours in his BSL-3 lab again until the 17th of October when Peter Jahrling asked him to quantify the spores in the Daschle letter.


  1. If a check is dated at 10 PM, it can be done earlier or later.

    If Ivins had time in B-313 before or after 10 PM, then he could have done the animal check in there at that time if the animals were in there.

    If Ivins had no time in B-313 on that date, he could not have made or processed anthrax there.

    If there are substantial times in B-313 on the dates of animal checks but not in the rest of B3, and that is determinable from the records, then that tends towards the conclusion the animals being tested were in B-313 and not another room in B3.

  2. Old Atlantic wrote: "that tends towards the conclusion the animals being tested were in B-313 and not another room in B3."

    Only if you begin with a preposterous belief that animals were kept in room B-313.

    Animals were kept in "animal rooms." Laboratories have no room for storing animals. The scientists in the laboratories wouldn't stand for the stink of the animals in their lab.

    Ivins' lab was jammed with equipment. It was only a 11x17 foot room. The room I'm in right now is 11x17. It's my office. In Ivins' lab he had at least 1, probably 2 and possibly 3 biosafety cabinets. He had an ice machine. He would have had a sink and tables. He probably had a small centrifuge. He had microscopes and various testing equipment. He had stacks of supplies. And during the day there would be THREE PEOPLE working in the lab There would be NO ROOM for animal cages.

    Besides, as I've stated, the facts say that Ivins left Suite B3 when it was time to check on the animals.

    You write: "If Ivins had no time in B-313 on that date, he could not have made or processed anthrax there."

    Ivins had all the time he needed. He didn't have anything else to do in B313 EXCEPT to make the anthrax powders.

    The data is clear. Ivins was in his lab when he was making the powders. When he had finished making the powders and had mailed the letters, he had no reason to be in his lab and he didn't go into his lab.

    The data shows that the only time Ivins was in his lab from September 17, 2001 through September 27, 2001, was on the 25th when he was cleaning light covers.

    If you believe the animals were in room B313, you need to explain why they didn't need any care during the times when Ivins was waiting for the letters to be delivered.

    The idea that the animals were kept in Ivins' lab is so PREPOSTEROUS that it needs proof beyond ANY doubt before it can even be seriously discussed. Just look at the photo of Ivins in his lab. It shows how crowed the room was around the door. There was barely room to walk. If you opened the door too far, it would bump into laboratory equipment.


  3. From emails you may have seen this morning, Ivins emails distinguish cold and hot rabbit space. This is consistent with the animal rooms in B3 being cold animal space and B-313 being hot animal space.

  4. Old Atlantic,

    I just posted a long comment on my web site explaining how ABSURD the idea is that Ivins kept animals in his BSL-3 lab.

    The comment also shows the December 19, 2001 email, what animal cages look like, and explains how anthrax IS handled in BSL-2 labs.

    Check it out. It might help.


  5. It seems to me that this would be a SIMPLE matter to verify: someone send an email to:

    1)Henry Heine and/or

    2)Pat Worsham and/or

    or any of those people who were Ivins' colleagues in the Bacteriology Division of USAMRIID. And ask whether animals which were infected with anthrax were then routinely returned to the animal room OR were kept in the BSL-3 lab OR (third possiblity) kept in a BSL-2 level holding area within the B-3 suite. (Other than that I can't see any other possibilities).
    I think, if you get an answer, it would be a straight answer (ie not tainted by whether the respondent believes Ivins guilty or innocent)

    This is simply a matter of fact-finding, NOT interpretaion. What might SEEM logical to us (non-anthrax workers) might just not be the real deal.

    Just a thought.

  6. Richard Rowley,

    I agree. The guy behind this debate sent me the email address for Pat Worsham. But, I can't see myself asking Worsham a question about someone else's bizarre theory.

    What we need is for the guy who believes this nonsense to ask Pat Worsham or Henry Heine to make a statement about where the animals were that Ivins check on during the period from September 28 through October 2. And then he should post the reply or replies on some forum somewhere.

    I tried asking USAMRIID's public affairs person some questions on another subject, but I received no answer. However, I asked 10 questions. I'll try again with just 2.