Barack Obama sacks adviser over talks with Hamas Robert Malley told The Times that he had been in regular contact with Hamas, which controls Gaza and is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organization TimesOnline.co.uk

Obama Promises Improved Ties With Egypt, Syria Aides said Obama had sent senior foreign policy adviser Robert Malley to Egypt and Syria over the last few weeks to outline the Democratic
candidate's policy on the Middle East. MiddleEastNewsline

Report: Obama lied about firing anti-Israel advisor Robert Malley, a top Middle East advisor that US President elect Barack Obama promised months ago would play no role in his administration due to ties to Hamas, has reportedly been sent out on the next administration's first diplomatic mission IsraelToday.co.il

Report: Obama Sends Advisor Malley to Cozy Up to Egypt and Syria One of the sponsors of the International Crisis Group is billionaire George Soros, who sits on its board and its executive committee. Other members of the board include former United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and former general Wesley Clark.
IsraelNatNews.com

Stock Market Goes Into Tailspin After Obama Elected U.S. Stocks Drop on concern Obama will struggle to reverse slowing economy. Bloomberg.com

Obama campaign workers angry over unpaid wages "I want my money today! It's my money. I want it right now!" yelled one former campaign worker. WTHR.com

Voter Fraud in Pennsylvania ? Townhall's Amanda Carpenter reports on a tip that voting machines in Philadelphia showed votes for Barack Obama -- before polls opened
RightSideNews.com

A Repeat of 2004 Philly Voter Chaos, Fraud - GOP Election Board members have been tossed out of polling stations in at least half a dozen polling stations in Philadelphia because of their party status. TownHall.com

False and Flawed Logic (anthrax & Ivins)
Part I

The AP has put out a report claiming the governments working theory is Mr. Ivins intent was to create a scenario where he could utilize his vaccine to test his cure for anthrax infection (with no source named).

But I believe this is deeply flawed logic. Mr. Ivins, a highly decorated scientist in his field, understood the importance of controlling incidental contamination of the anthrax spores, would never have knowingly allowed weaponized spores to be released into an uncontrolled environment. Where he could not control the infection rate and could possibly have killed tens of thousands. That is a risk he would not have taken.

The letters were sent through the U.S. postal system. I believe, was intentional to disperse the weaponized spores at an uncontrolled rate, spreading them everywhere through the sorting machines and onto other mail which ran through the same system. The attack was intended to infect and kill as many as possible, for maximum effect. (Who needed crop-duster's when you had the U.S.P.S. to deliver it at the price of a postage stamp?)

There would have been no way to control the infection rate which could have killed many. What good would that have done for Ivins, that would have undoubtedly brought unwanted attention to him for his miracle cure? That surely would make him a suspect. He would have thought that through. He was a very smart scientist, or else he wouldn’t have been where he was at.

I think too many people are watching too many fiction type Hollywood movies and taking them literally. Sort of like the “curveball” source who fabricated up bio weapons labs on wheels which Saddam moved around Iraq to avoid detection. Like it was some type of James Bond movie.

Link to AP story: Suicide Latest Twist In 7 Yr. Anthrax Saga

TW 8/02/2008

False and Flawed Logic (anthrax & Ivins)
Part II

The Raven’s Pestilence

Shortly before the first anthrax attack letters were made public, a newspaper owned by Uday Hussein, son of Saddam Hussein, ran a long front page rant. Buried deeply and near the bottom of the page was a quote. It said, “The Raven’s Pestilence Is Harassing The Motherland, But At Last, Pestilence Comes To The Raven’s Nest”, it also went on to say “At First, The Virus Will Be Susceptible To Anti-biotic“. This, according to Richard Spertzel, the former head of the biological weapons section of UNSCOM, and who was a member of the Iraq Survey Group, was more than a mere coincidence. It was a clue.

The definition of “pestilence” in the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the word as ”a contagious or infectious epidemic disease that is virulent and devastating, or something that is destructive or pernicious”. Although anthrax is not infectious disease as in being spread from human to human contact, Mr. Spertzel believed it was a reference to the anthrax attacks.

Today, the FBI released some of the circumstantial evidence they built against Mr. Ivins. I asked Mr. Spertzel if it changed his views in any way. Nope, he said. “there are not any details” and “you can’t make anything out of it” referring to the selectively released documents, some with partial information only, like the emails.

Mr. Spertzel thought it was ridiculous that Ivins was being accused of making the weapons grade (weaponized) anthrax. “It is impossible for any one person, to have made the weapons grade anthrax, at least without anyone else knowing about it, or being part of it“.

I have always believed that the anthrax attacks were from Iraq. So I asked Mr. Spertzel what he thought and he believes the weapons grade anthrax itself was a product of a joint venture between Syria and Iraq, noting the agreement between the two countries for the development of chemical and biological weapons starting in 1994, as he testified to before the U.S. Congress.

The 2001 anthrax attacks had all of the hallmarks of Iraqi intelligence operation, it was the way they operated, Mr. Spertzel said..

TW 8/06/2008

False and Flawed Logic (anthrax & Ivins)

The Cover-UP

With the release of a microbial amount of the circumstantial scientific evidence today by the FBI, Dr. Majidi, the assistant director responsible for the FBI’s Weapons of mass destruction directorate thinks he has it right. I don’t believe he does.

I am going to back up a little bit here. Over the previous several weeks, there had been a concerted attempt to smear Dr. Ivins in the press prior to this release of circumstantial type of evidence. The leaks dripped in the LA Times, the AP, the Washpost., the N.Y.Times etc., day after day after day. There was not one scintilla of hard evidence throughout that entire period that could even come close to convicting Dr. Ivins in a court of law alone or compiled together.

So now everyone is asking why would they do that? The answer is because they needed good information that surrounded the test results. Which they do not have, and to me and many others, the information that was leaked looks less than circumstantial, and more at a very long reach, would be more precise in judging the so-called circumstantial evidence.. So without good solid evidence and information surrounding the test results Dr. Majidi thinks he has, there is absolutely nothing.

The strategy was to convict a dead man in the court of public opinion, making it easier for the public and the U.S. Congress to accept a “novelty approach for the application of techniques in microbiology”. In other words, it would never stand up alone in a court of law.

Now the strategy by Dr. Majidi, is to resort to the same tactic, of drip, drip and drip of the novelty scientific evidence he thinks he has. If the scientific evidence was really that strong, no one would hesitate to publish it in its entirety and without leaving anything out.

Richard Spertzel was interviewed by the New York Times about this release of scientific evidence. He remarked about the evidence “ it’s a pretty tenuous argument” meaning according to definition, flimsy, weak and shaky.

If I were Senator Grassley, I would start with the leaks, every one of them. To reiterate, there was a reason for the long dripping of leaks, and that was to bolster the weak evidence and information surrounding the “novelty” scientific evidence.

TW 9/19/2008

False and Flawed Logic (anthrax & Ivins)

Weaponized Anthrax

Part IV

The reporting that the anthrax wasn’t weaponized isn’t correct. To the contrary, the anthrax was weaponized.

Lets start with the batch type of anthrax that was sent to Senator Leahy and Senator Daschle. The ultra-fineness of the powder, 1.5 - 3 microns particle size indicates a form of weaponization alone, or explained in another term, made into weapons grade attack anthrax.

The spores (particles) we so light weight and small, when the scientist attempted to analyze the attack anthrax type that was sent to Daschle and Leahy, it was nearly impossible because the spores became airborne, and as one scientist put it, “they just were flying around everywhere“.

A recent report made public by the Sandia labs indicated, there was not any coating of silica or likewise present on the anthrax spores from Ivins flask. However, initial reports about the attack anthrax that was sent to Senator Daschle and Senator Leahy contained silica. So here we have a huge contradiction. According to a source familiar with the test for silica stated, “there definitely was a sharp spike indicating the presence of silica in the anthrax” (sent to Daschle and Leahy).

The FBI scientist tried to explain away any presence, by saying the silica leached off the glass (beakers or plates or whatever) during the FBI’s analysis or storage of the anthrax, and that is how any trace presence of silica occurred.

But, according to bio-weapons scientist around the world, say they have never heard of such a thing. Richard Spertzel, the former head of the biological weapons section of UNSCOM, and who was a weapons inspector in the Iraq Survey Group, said the explanation is “total nonsense”.

To this date, the FBI scientist have not been able to reverse engineer (dissect and reconstruct) the anthrax with the silica included. In other words, they have not been able to reverse engineer (dissect and reconstruct) the exact composition of the anthrax sent to Daschle and Leahy as it exist.

It took a year (Aug. 2002) to find the mail box in Princeton, New Jersey where the letters were mailed from. This mailbox had both incoming mail and out going pre-sorted mail to be delivered by the mail person.

Even after a whole year of incoming mail being dropped into the box, and the letter carriers removing the mail on a regular basis, the persons who tested the mailbox were still able to detect the anthrax spores.

The anthrax envelopes were reported to have been covered in packaging tape, but they were leaking spores and "flying around then", as the test for the contaminated mailbox confirmed. The envelopes did not run through any sorting equipment up until that point, and the sender (s) was very careful to tape the entire envelope with package sealing tape. This would indicate to me the envelopes leaked the spores intentionally some way, at a controlled rate. A possible reason the tape would have been placed over the entire anthrax filled envelopes, is so they would not burst open when run through the postal machinery.

But there could have been more than one reason for taping of the envelopes. After thinking this through, one could easily imagine there being a hole or small slit in each end of the envelope or something similar (puffer envelopes). This would allow the envelope to breath (expand and contract) and disperse the spores at a rate, that would be consistent with levels of contamination, that occurred with their travels from the mailbox, through the postal system, and then on to the Senators offices. Another possible reason for the taping, would be to keep the spores from absorbing any moisture, and then clumping together. Which would nullify the spores weaponized properties.

There have been other reports stating only the seams and edges (top-bottom-sides) of the envelope were to have been taped. And that the envelopes (paper) were to have been very porous, which when run through the sorting machines, would have forced out the spores under pressure (expansion & contraction). But, (and this is a big but) the spores were found and probably flying around inside the mailbox located in Princeton, NJ., when the mail box tested positive for anthrax in Aug. 2002 ( a whole year later). That leads me to believe that the envelopes were meant to, like I said before, designed to leak someway. Whether or not there was a slit or holes, and or only extremely porous type of paper used, the envelopes still would have expanded and contracted when moved or subjected to different types of pressurization. This most likely was by design.

Former bio-weapons inspector Richard Spertzel said the offices of Senator Leahy and Daschle were completely sealed off for 28 days. That meant no one was inside of the offices for a whole month. According to Richard Spertzel, "when the doors were unsealed and opened up, the spores just lifted off from wherever they were settled and floated around everywhere, with ease". This is what would have happened whenever the mailbox (in Princeton) was opened multiple times. They would fly around, and then settle, until they were disturbed again.

The anthrax type that was sent to Sen. Leahy and Sen. Daschle was weaponized, as the ultra-fineness indicated (1.5 - 3.0 microns). Whether or not the attack anthrax had an actual coating on in it is a moot point, as this is not a requirement for weaponization or as bio weapons scientist like to refer to it, as military grade made anthrax.

TW 8/24/2008

correction: removed the word "still" paragraph 9, added "possible" before the word "reason" in paragraph 9, added paragraph 10 to the analysis 8/27/2008 Added paragraph 12 & 13 to the analysis 9/02/2008 - TW

TW 8/24/2008

Did FBI Scientists Identify a Single, Unique Flask? by Kathryn Muratore - is an Assistant Professor of Chemistry at American University: "We are slowly getting more information about the FBI's lack of a case against Bruce Ivins", "we were initially told by the FBI-parroting media that sophisticated scientific techniques could uniquely identify Ivins' flask as the smoking gun, we learn that even this flimsy piece of evidence isn't true: there are 8 known smoking guns and a theoretically infinite number of unknown smoking guns" LewRockwell.com

Former Chief of UNSCOM Biological Weapons Unit Richard Spertzel: Bruce Ivins Wasn't The Anthrax Culprit - WallStJournal.com

The Anthrax Fiasco - The FBI's mad scientist theory also fit the agenda of the political left, which didn't want the trail of evidence to prove state-sponsorship of terror – particularly by Iraq. (Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times pushed the Hatfill theory of the case especially hard.) But the possibility of a foreign source should never have been downplayed. WallStJournal.com