Page 1 of 1
Update on Anthrax Attack suspect
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:47 pm
by tanstaafl2
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:01 pm
by themanintheseersuckersuit
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:15 pm
by silvercamaro
So if this guy was such a homicidal nut job, why didn't anybody notice it during the five years or so while government investigators were persecuting the previous suspect?
I remain somewhat dubious.
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:27 pm
by tanstaafl2
silvercamaro wrote:So if this guy was such a homicidal nut job, why didn't anybody notice it during the five years or so while government investigators were persecuting the previous suspect?
I remain somewhat dubious.
He blended right in because it is a clear and concise description of many a fine federal employee. Take me for example...
Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:45 pm
by VAdame
tanstaafl2 wrote:silvercamaro wrote:So if this guy was such a homicidal nut job, why didn't anybody notice it during the five years or so while government investigators were persecuting the previous suspect?
I remain somewhat dubious.
He blended right in because it is a clear and concise description of many a fine federal employee. Take me for example...
Hey -- I resemble that remark!
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:08 am
by silvercamaro
I've been reading more about this over the weekend, and I'm increasingly bothered. The person quoted in early news stories about Ivins -- the person who declared him to be "homicidal" and "sociopathic", and the one originally described as "his therapist" or "his counselor" -- turns out to be a social worker.
Not a psychiatrist, nor even a psychologist, but a social worker.
Many social workers do good stuff, and the best ones aren't paid nearly enough, but there's no way that majoring in social work in college provides enough academic background or practical training to qualify one to diagnose psychiatric conditions.
Furthermore, the "DNA evidence" that supposedly links the anthrax spores to Ivins' lab offers no recognition that the lab never made powdered anthrax, as was present in the tainted letters, nor that 27 vials of anthrax had mysteriously been lost or stolen over a period of several years.
I maintain reasonable doubt that the man driven to suicide was the person guilty of the crime.
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:51 pm
by Bob Juch
silvercamaro wrote:I've been reading more about this over the weekend, and I'm increasingly bothered. The person quoted in early news stories about Ivins -- the person who declared him to be "homicidal" and "sociopathic", and the one originally described as "his therapist" or "his counselor" -- turns out to be a social worker.
Not a psychiatrist, nor even a psychologist, but a social worker.
Many social workers do good stuff, and the best ones aren't paid nearly enough, but there's no way that majoring in social work in college provides enough academic background or practical training to qualify one to diagnose psychiatric conditions.
Furthermore, the "DNA evidence" that supposedly links the anthrax spores to Ivins' lab offers no recognition that the lab never
made powdered anthrax, as was present in the tainted letters, nor that 27 vials of anthrax had mysteriously been lost or stolen over a period of several years.
I maintain reasonable doubt that the man driven to suicide was the person guilty of the crime.
Is it possible that the missing anthrax was powdered?
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 1:03 pm
by silvercamaro
Bob Juch wrote:
Is it possible that the missing anthrax was powdered?
Supposedly, that particular laboratory never had nor made powdered anthrax.
Also, since the letters were mailed from Trenton, N.J. on different dates, Ivins seemingly would have had to drive roughly 400 miles to mail each one.
All of the known evidence against Ivins is circumstantial, coupled with the dubious statement of the social worker.
I'm not saying that anything is impossible, but to me it seems unlikely.
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:40 pm
by Buffacuse
W/O going into much detail, I have a family member who knows Ivins and I remember hearing him described, years ago, as "very odd."
That does not make him a killer, but coming to a group therapy session and openly talking about a plan to kill people would have made ME go to the police.
Putting everything together, I do think he was involved. I am not convinced, however, that he acted alone. I would like to see handwriting analysis of the letters/envelopes sent during the attacks compared to Ivins'. To me, that would tie things up if they match--and if not, they have some more work to do.
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 8:12 pm
by silvercamaro
Buffacuse wrote:W/O going into much detail, I have a family member who knows Ivins and I remember hearing him described, years ago, as "very odd."
That does not make him a killer, but coming to a group therapy session and openly talking about a plan to kill people would have made ME go to the police.
Putting everything together, I do think he was involved. I am not convinced, however, that he acted alone. I would like to see handwriting analysis of the letters/envelopes sent during the attacks compared to Ivins'. To me, that would tie things up if they match--and if not, they have some more work to do.
All of us are "very odd" according to somebody or another.
According to this news story --
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080805/ap_ ... estigation --
the social worker made her statement to a judge on July 24. This would be after multiple interviews with investigators. Is it possible that those interviews influenced her opinions greatly? If not, then why didn't she bother to report her conclusions much earlier? I have not heard any verification of Ivin's "plan to kill people" from any one else in that therapy group? Will we? I don't know. I just don't buy the whole story at this point.
I am not anti-government, by any means, but until we the public are offered more details, I will consider the possibility that the scientist was, in essence, hounded to death, even if that was not anyone's intention. If nothing else, his suicide provides a convenient way for investigators to close an unsolved case.
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 6:24 am
by themanintheseersuckersuit
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 7:22 am
by mrkelley23
This one seems to stink much more than Vince Foster.
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 9:44 am
by Bob Juch
It's easy: he borrowed the equipment!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26027514/
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:47 am
by silvercamaro
Paragraph from the MSNBC story about regulations on security clearance:
"The Army issued final rules last week that would cover workers who act in an aggressive or threatening manner. Those employees would be denied access to toxic or lethal biological agents under the revised regulations. Other potentially disqualifying personality traits include 'arrogance, inflexibility, suspiciousness, hostility . . . and extreme moods or mood swings,' according to the document."
In one way or another, I'd guess that covers almost everyone around here.
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:58 am
by SportsFan68
silvercamaro wrote:Paragraph from the MSNBC story about regulations on security clearance:
"The Army issued final rules last week that would cover workers who act in an aggressive or threatening manner. Those employees would be denied access to toxic or lethal biological agents under the revised regulations. Other potentially disqualifying personality traits include 'arrogance, inflexibility, suspiciousness, hostility . . . and extreme moods or mood swings,' according to the document."
In one way or another, I'd guess that covers almost everyone around here.
I had extreme hostility and mood swings weekend before last.
Then I got outta downtown Denver traffic.
No wonder Hickenlooper is pushing a green Democratic National Convention. He wants everybody to get there any way possible except for cars or cabs into the convention area. Can't say I blame him...