AP -Congress Demands Answers on Anthrax

[rodeodance]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/wire/sns-ap-fbi-anthrax,1,7322154.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines


Congress Demands Answers on Anthrax

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer
7:42 AM PST, December 12, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Thirty-three members of Congress have written Attorney General Alberto Gonzales demanding that the FBI update lawmakers on the investigation into the anthrax attacks five years ago that paralyzed the nation with bio-terror fears.

The bipartisan letter escalates efforts by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., to get the FBI to tell lawmakers what it has learned during the five-year case that remains unsolved. The FBI has refused, citing concerns about possible leaks.



The lawmakers said any leakers of prior information about the anthrax case inside the FBI or Congress should be punished but that such concerns do not justify keeping information from lawmakers so they could perform their required oversight of the FBI's performance.

The case remains unsolved five years later.

"As an institution, Congress cannot be cut-off from detailed information about the conduct of one of the largest investigations in FBI history," the lawmakers wrote. "That information is vital in order to fulfill its Constitutional responsibility to conduct oversight." ......

[VegasWolf]

1. Let the Investigations begin!!!! nt

[rodeodance]

6. way past time to find some answers!

[Rex]

2. Cheney won't like this.

His FBI has been a good pawn over the last 6 years. Oversight...brrrr...did it just get a lot colder in here?

Watch as the rats jump ship.

[Mnemosyne]

3. Yes, yes yes!! knr n/t

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. If anyone caught the Judicial Committee session with Mueller

it was pleasantly surprising to see/hear Grassley come on strong about this toward the end of the hearing. Leahy told Mueller in no uncertain terms, the committee WILL be looking into this.

It almost, ALMOST sounds like they held off sending the letter until Congress adjourned.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

5. How exactly would a leak hurt an investigation that has gone nowhere in 5 years?

[SpiralHawk]

7. The know who did it and under whose orders

[Gregorian]

8. Oh boy! Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy!

And now I am off to go roam the land in search of butter. Really! I'm so excited about this, I'm leaving the confines of my tomb and going shopping.

Here, have this people-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNF7dIbY_ts


Can you tell I'm excited?

PS: OH BOY!

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. This reminds me of that Kevin Costner movie.

The one where he's a double agent for the USSR, but also a US military man who made his way up the ranks, and his love interest, Sean Young, gets killed, only he didn't do it, but he realizes that he's going to get framed for the murder, even though he didn't do it, but he IS a double-agent for the USSR and he knows that's going to be figured out in the investigation, and you even get to see how much time he has because a computer in the FBI department is enhancing a photo of the suspect, better than the Eckerd's Photo Center can do, and he knows that eventually, he'll be found out for something worse than murder, so the whole movie is about how he tries to slow down the investigation to try to find the REAL murderer so that they don't find out he's a mole.

Anyways, asking the FBI to reveal the results of their anthrax investigation is something like that. Or maybe not.

[Joanne98]

10. Oh boy!

[Ezlivin]

11. Investigate all terrorist attacks since 9/11

The so-called "9/11 Commission Report" was worse than a whitewash.

We need a thorough and independent investigation of the events of 9/11 and the anthrax attacks that followed. Starting with what happened with WTC 7 (below)....

[Peace Patriot]

12. "...remains unsolved five years later." So many things remain unsolved!

Why Diebold/ES&S election theft machines switch or disappear only Democratic votes?

Why the corporate news consortium that proved that Gore won in 2000 waited until just after 9/11 to publish their findings?

Why a Congress with an 18% approval rating passed yet more tax cuts for the rich, and environmental degradation, two days before its session came to its final toadying, lapdog, "pod people," miserable, stinking conclusion?

Why did Donald Rumsfeld pull all NORAD decisions into his own hands, six months before 9/11, and then go AWOL during the critical hour, with hijacked planes heading for Washington DC and the WTC in flames?

Why did NORAD fail to follow standard procedure on 9/11, and get jets in the air to check out the hijacked planes?

Why did the Democratic Party leadership fail to raise a word of objection to Bushite electronic voting corporations gaining control of our election system, with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code?

Why did the anthrax get sent mostly to Democrats? (Was it to make them vote for TRADE SECRET vote counting, and unjust war?)

How is it that the FBI got to Paul Wellstone's plane crash site as quickly as they did, without knowing about it ahead of time? Who put the story out that the weather was bad, and why did it gain currency?

Isn't it odd that John Ashcroft, whose Senate opponent Mel Carnahan's plane crashed, and then Ashcroft (after losing to the dead man) became Attorney General during Paul Wellstone's plane crash?

What did Dick Cheney and Gary Condit really talk about in their meeting on May 1, 2001, during the hours of Chandra Levy's disappearance?

What was in the Diebold "trade secret" proprietary programming code in California's touchscreen voting machines, that was so bad that they had to "swift-boat" Democratic Secretary of State Kevin Shelley out of office, in early 2005, so that it would never see the light of day?

What did the British WMD expert David Kelly know that got him killed four days after the US WMD expert Valerie Plame was outed? And why did the Bushites then additionally out the entire Brewster-Jennings WMD counter-proliferation network, putting all of its covert agents/contacts around the world in extreme danger?

I could go on--back over the years. So many puzzles. So many destructions of people, knowledge and expertise. So much destruction of democracy, openness and progress.

We may all be wondering how Nancy Pelosi could say that "impeachment is off the table." Did it ever occur to any of us that her life may have been threatened? These are not normal political times. These are dire times, with our democracy in grave danger. The global corporate predators who are running things kill anyone they cannot buy or blackmail, or destroy their careers. They did it to Plame. They did it to Shelley. They did it to Dean. They did it to Kerry. They more than likely did it, with finality, to Paul Wellstone and David Kelly. They use anthrax, and assassination, and their corporate news monopolies--to intimidate people, to silence them, to destroy them. They've been doing this in places like South and Central America for decades. Now they are doing it here. We are the "banana republic" now. They have sucked our treasury dry--decades into the future, with a $10 TRILLION debt. They've stolen billions and billions and billions of dollars, way back starting with Reagan and the looting of the S&Ls, on to California and the theft of $9 billion--the entire state budget surplus--by Bush's buds at Enron, to forcing US taxpayers to pay billions of dollars to Bush's buds at Diebold and ES&S for election theft machinery--to steal our elections with, paid for by us--to the mind-boggling military contractor boondoggle in Iraq. They've slaughtered people by the tens of thousands without a thought, without a care, without conscience. They are the "military-industrial complex"--the war profiteers--that Eisenhower warned us of in his last days in office.

Against this fascist Junta, we have our memories and dreams of democracy--and a lot of good people working with passion to restore it. They did it in South America, with an even worse history of brutality and fascism that we have here--peaceful, democratic, leftist (majorityist) revolutions in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador--virtually the entire continent--now even in Nicaragua, and a big one struggling toward the light (through very hard and brutal times) in Mexico. If the South Americans can do it, so can we. They started with nitty gritty grass roots organization and work on transparent elections. So can we. Do not despair!

Think of Michele Batchelet, her father tortured to death by Pinochet, and she herself tortured and exiled from her beloved country. Now she is president of it. Think of Nelson Mandela, in jail for 30 years--emerging to the miracle of the end of apartheid and his own election as the first black president of South Africa. In neither of these cases was there any apparent reason for hope, during the period of oppression. Most of the horrors occurred off stage, with no accountability. People had to dig for the truth--for years, for decades. And they had to labor ceaselessly to restore good people to government.

Miracles do happen, if you keep your eyes and your hearts open, and do not give up hope.

[thingfisher]

13. You speak what many of us are thinking.

Saw a new broadcast yesterday about the Pinochet funeral. The whole story focussed on Chilean citizens who view Mr. P as the saviour of their country (he kept them from going commie). I guess they really appreciate Henry Kissinger too.

So much skullduggery in our country and world!

[seemslikeadream]

14. Congress Demands Answers on Anthrax

http://www.wvva.com/News/index.php?ID=8840

CAPITOL HILL (AP) -- Thirty-three members of Congress are demanding that the F-B-I provide an update on their investigation of the anthrax attacks that killed two postal workers and shut down the Hart Senate Office Building for several months more than five years ago.

The bipartisan letter is signed by both Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate.

The F-B-I has been investigating the incident since the first anthrax tainted letters were discovered in October of 2001, but no one has ever been charged. The F-B-I has refused to tell members of Congress about the probe, citing concerns about possible leaks.

Two postal workers died and several more were exposed to anthrax, including a Stafford County man who became very ill.

The Brentwood postal service distribution center was closed for 26 months while crews did decontamination work that cost 130 (m) million dollars.

[tridim]

15. Ahh, so NOW the Repukes want answers?

Sorry assholes, it's too late. Enjoy the investigations and subpoenas.

[jpak]

17. Leahy is gonna tear them a new one - should be fun teevee

:popcorn:

[tridim]

18. C-SPAN's ratings are going to go through the roof next year

I wish I could buy C-SPAN stock.

[Bushknew]

28. It's going to be sweet.

[tblue]

16. These were acts of bioterrorism. I can't wait for the 110th Congress to start cleaning up this sh*t

[seemslikeadream]

19. GRASSLEY CALLS ON FBI TO PROVIDE BRIEFING, DOCUMENTS ON UNSOLVED ANTHRAX CASE

http://www.senate.gov/~grassley/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=5205&Month=10&Year=2006

GRASSLEY CALLS ON FBI TO PROVIDE BRIEFING, DOCUMENTS ON UNSOLVED ANTHRAX CASE

WASHINGTON – After years of dead-ends and a lack of progress in the FBI’s search for the person(s) who targeted members of Congress with a deadly strain of anthrax, Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa has requested a full briefing and a number of documents related to the case. Grassley requested the information through a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.


“I’m afraid the anthrax investigation may be a symptom of a larger problem at the FBI. The agency’s lack of response to Congressional requests for a briefing and what appears to be little progress in the investigation leads me to question whether the culture has really changed,” Grassley said. “There are numerous and serious questions that need to be answered about both the investigation itself and how the FBI has handled it. The FBI’s refusal to brief Congress over the last several years is an outrageous response to reasonable requests at getting to the bottom of the attacks.”



Grassley's oversight of the FBI began in the early 1990's. He has focused on the FBI’s internal disciplinary problems in recent years after revelations of senior officials committing misconduct and escaping accountability through a double standard in discipline. He's also been concerned with the FBI's inability to prevent crime and terrorism rather than just investigating crimes after they have occurred. Grassley was concerned about classifying people as “persons of interest” since the Department of Justice first labeled Hatfill several years ago.



Here is a copy of Grassley’s letter to Gonzales. A copy of the actual letter can be found by clicking here.



Monday, October 23, 2006



The Honorable Alberto Gonzales

Attorney General

United States Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20535



Dear General Gonzales:



Five years ago, on October 15, 2001, a letter laced with anthrax and addressed to Senator Tom Daschle was opened, and Congress became one of the targets in the first bio-terrorist attack on the United States. In the wake of 9/11, the anthrax letters took the lives of five more Americans and infected another 17. The FBI took primary responsibility for investigating the attacks and has expended hundreds of thousands of hours on it in the past five years. Yet, it appears from publicly available information that despite all those resources, the FBI has little in the way of results to show for its work.



According to public reports, the head of the FBI’s investigation, Richard Lambert, was recently transferred to the FBI’s Knoxville, Tennessee office following the completion of a comprehensive report prepared for the U.S. Attorney’s office in charge of the case. This raises questions about why he was replaced, the focus of the FBI’s investigation under his leadership, and whether that focus shifted following the report and the assignment of new leadership to the case. There have also been suggestions in the press that scientific advances have shown that the anthrax spores were less-sophisticated than was originally believed, and that this may have caused the focus on potential suspects to be too narrow for too long.



While this is all troubling, I am concerned that a detailed examination of the FBI’s handling of the anthrax case may point to deeper issues than just lack of progress on a difficult, if not impossible-to-solve whodunit. Those issues include (1) the FBIs institutional resistance to criticism and dissent, (2) the challenges of integrating law enforcement and domestic intelligence gathering functions into one agency, (3) the misallocation of resources toward protecting the FBI’s image first and foremost, rather than protecting the United States, and (4) the FBI’s unwillingness to submit to oversight by the elected representatives of the American people. Perhaps an independent review would show that the public version of events that leads to my concern about these issues is not accurate or that the reality is less alarming than the perception. However, in order to find out, there must be independent Congressional review of the FBI’s actions.



Many of the resources devoted to the anthrax investigation over the last five years were aimed at attempting to prove that Dr. Stephen Hatfill was involved in the attacks. Congress ought to know exactly what the price tag on those efforts has been. I have previously expressed my concern over the Justice Department’s unprecedented use of the term “person of interest” to cast suspicion on an individual citizen without any formal policy or evidentiary standard. I have also previously expressed concern over the Justice Department’s actions in orchestrating the firing of Dr. Hatfill from his employment with Louisiana State University, where he was training first responders.



As you know, Dr. Hatfill is suing the Justice Department, alleging that in an effort to counter the perception that it was incapable of solving the case, the FBI “intentionally and willfully leaked to innumerable reporters” information about investigative interest in him. He alleges that these leaks have “numbered in the hundreds since 2002 and have continued even into <2005>.” In particular, within minutes of Dr. Hatfill giving his consent to the FBI to search his apartment, the building was surrounded by reporters, camera crews, and helicopters from the news media. The complaint in his lawsuit alleges that “According to one FBI agent on site at the time,” cameras arrived so quickly that “it was obvious that they had been tipped off<.>” Of the many searches of scientists’ homes, the lawsuit alleges that, “this was the first time that the name of any of these scientists had been purposefully leaked to the media.” Instead of making any serious effort to identify and punish the FBI officials for leaking investigative information, the lawsuit alleges that on one occasion, Director Mueller actually reprimanded an FBI official for suggesting that it might have been inappropriate for Attorney General Ashcroft to publicly name Hatfill as a “person of interest.”



In light of all this, I was shocked to see press reports that the FBI recently announced a blanket prohibition on any further anthrax briefings to Congress. In response to a letter from Congressman Rush Holt requesting a classified briefing before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the FBI’s Assistant Director for Congressional Affairs flatly refused. She wrote, “After sensitive information about the investigation citing Congressional sources was reported in the media, the Department of Justice and the FBI agreed that no additional briefings to Congress would be provided.” The implication is clear: “We won’t brief you because you will leak.”



This is an outrageous response to a legitimate oversight request from Congress. Given the allegations about FBI leaks related to Stephen Hatfill and its similar leaks related to Richard Jewell in the Centennial Park Bombing Case, for the FBI to withhold information from Congress for fear of leaks seems a bit hypocritical, to say the least.



The harm caused by the alleged FBI leaks was to instigate a media frenzy and cast suspicion on an individual citizen entitled to the presumption of innocence. What was the harm of the alleged Congressional leak? The FBI’s letter doesn’t say. However, if some individual did act inappropriately by speaking to the media about an FBI briefing, stiff-arming Congress on all future requests is an unacceptable overreaction. The FBI doesn’t become exempt from scrutiny just because there may have been an inappropriate disclosure by someone on Capitol Hill. If that happened, the FBI should prove it and the individuals involved should be held accountable, but the institution of Congress has a vital and continuing need for detailed information about the conduct of one of the largest investigations in FBI history.



The FBI’s letter also stated, “Since we regard this as a criminal law enforcement matter, rather than an intelligence activity, a briefing would not be appropriate<.>” Why isn’t it both? The failure of the FBI to treat the case as both a criminal and intelligence matter illustrates how far the FBI is from understanding its core post-9/11 mission. In order to effectively integrate the law enforcement and intelligence gathering functions, all law enforcement matters must be viewed as potential sources of valuable intelligence. This is especially true for a case the size and scope of Amerithrax. Since the FBI investigation is cloaked in grand jury secrecy, it is unclear to what extent the vast amount of information it must have gathered in the last five years is being shared with the rest of the intelligence community. Congress needs to have a better understanding of this issue in order to assess the effectiveness of its post-9/11 legislation, such as the USA PATRIOT Act, the Homeland Security Act, and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act.



For all these reasons, I request that you direct the FBI to provide a comprehensive briefing on the status of the anthrax investigation to all interested Congressional committees. In preparation for that briefing, please provide: (1) a copy of the comprehensive report prepared for the U.S. Attorney’s office prior to the recent replacement of the lead FBI investigator, (2) any and all final reports and/or closing memoranda of the DOJ and FBI Offices of Professional Responsibility and/or the DOJ Office of Inspector General in matters relating to the Amerithrax investigation, and (3) detailed, written answers to the following questions:



1. (a) Why was Richard Lambert removed as the head of the Amerithrax investigation? (b) Was it related in any way to disagreements between him and others working on the investigation about the proper scope and focus of the FBI’s inquiry? If so, please explain. (c) Please identify and describe any and all documents related to Richard Lambert’s transfer.

2. (a) Has the FBI been able to narrow the possible source of the anthrax used to a finite number of labs? If so, how many? (b) What basis, if any, does the FBI have to believe that the anthrax was obtained directly from a lab by the terrorist?

3. (a) How many “persons of interest” other than the Dr. Stephen Hatfill are still of interest to the FBI? (b) How many, if any, individuals have been removed from the “persons of interest” list in the last five years? (c) Describe what criteria, if any, are used to determine when someone is removed from the “persons of interest” list.

4. (a) What has been the total cost of the investigation so far? (b) Of the 9,100 interviews, 67 searches, and 6,000 grand jury subpoenas in the Amerithrax investigation, how many were unrelated to Dr. Stephen Hatfill? (c) How many were related to the potential that foreign-born terrorists were involved in the attacks? (d) How many were related to leads not consistent with the initial FBI suspect profile? (e) Has the FBI altered its initial suspect profile in any way in the last 5 years? Please explain why or why not.

5. Are the public reports true that Dr. Christos Tsonas at Holy Cross Hospital in Fort Lauderdale, Florida treated Ahmed al-Haznawi, one of the 9/11 hijackers for a lesion that he thought "was consistent with cutaneous anthrax" and that a 2002 memorandum prepared by experts at the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies concluded that the diagnosis of cutaneous anthrax was "the most probable and coherent interpretation of the data available?"

6. In March 2002, John E. Collingwood, an FBI spokesman, was quoted dismissing the possibility that the 9/11 hijackers handled anthrax, saying: “This was fully investigated and widely vetted among multiple agencies several months ago. Exhaustive testing did not support that anthrax was present anywhere the hijackers had been.” (a) Has exhaustive testing been conducted where Dr. Stephen Hatfill has been? (b) Did those test results support that anthrax was present in any of those locations? (c) If not, then please explain why those test results have not been announced publicly, just as the 9/11 hijacker test results were four years ago?

7. (a) What are the names of the officials responsible for determining that the anthrax attacks would be treated solely as a criminal law enforcement matter and not as an intelligence matter? (b) On what date was that decision made? (c) Please describe what criteria are used to classify a case as a criminal matter rather than an intelligence matter. (d) Please identify and describe any and all records, documents, or memoranda related to that decision.

8. (a) Please describe the procedures for sharing information about the anthrax investigation with the rest of the intelligence community. (b) Please describe the types and volume of information about the anthrax investigation that has been shared with the intelligence community. (c) Please describe the types and volume information about the Anthrax investigation withheld from the intelligence community, including a description of each occasion in which another government agency has requested information about the investigation and the request was declined.

9. (a) On how many occasions, and with what agency, has grand jury or other information gathered during the Amerithrax investigation been shared outside the Justice Department pursuant to Section 203 of the USA PATRIOT ACT? (b) On how many occasions has information gathered during the course of the Amerithrax investigation been shared outside the Justice Department pursuant to Section 905(a)(1) of the USA PATRIOT ACT? (c) On how many occasions has information gathered during the course of the Amerithrax investigation been withheld under Section 905(a)(2)?

10. (a) Other than the FBI’s Amerithrax investigative team, is there anyone else in the U.S. government tasked with examining the anthrax attacks and making a judgment about their likely origin? (b) If so, please explain. If not, why not?

11. (a) Has the FBI ever employed a “red-teaming” strategy in which a second group of investigators is tasked with looking at the evidence with the freedom to pursue alternative theories of the case? (b) If so, please explain. If not, why not?

12. (a) What are the names of the officials responsible for the decision to impose a blanket prohibition on all Congressional briefings related to the Amerithrax investigation? (b) On what date was that decision made? (c) What is the legal justification for such a decision? (c) Please identify and describe any and all records, documents, or memoranda related to that decision.

13. (a) What steps have been taken to determine who was responsible for the alleged Congressional leak? (b) Did the alleged Congressional leak involve the disclosure of classified information? (c) Did it involve the violation of an agreement not to further disseminate the information? (d) If the FBI believes that a Congressional leak damaged its investigation, as was implied it its September 28, 2006, letter, what steps, if any, has it taken to describe the nature of the damage and communicate its concern to the appropriate leadership or other authorities in Congress? (e) If none, then please explain why not.

14. (a) On how many occasions have Justice Department and/or FBI personnel leaked investigative information about Stephen Hatfill or the Amerithrax case? (b) What steps have been taken to investigate those leaks and discipline those responsible? (c) Please provide a list of the names of each government official interviewed, questioned under oath, or subjected to a polygraph examination regarding Amerithrax-related leaks, along with the dates of their testimony and the results of any polygraphs. (c) How many Justice Department and FBI personnel have been reprimanded or punished for leaking such information? (d) If any, please provide a detailed explanation of each instance. (e) What steps have been taken to prevent or deter future leaks by DOJ or FBI personnel of information related to the Amerithrax investigation?



Please provide the requested documents, written answers to these questions, and a proposed briefing date no later than November 21, 2006, the fifth anniversary of the death of Ottilie Lundgren, the last known fatality among the victims of the anthrax attacks. Any classified material responsive to this request should be sent to the Office of Senate Security. Any non-classified responsive material should be faxed to the attention of Jason Foster at [phone] or hand-delivered to Room 203, Hart Senate Office Building.



Sincerely,





Charles E. Grassley

Chairman



cc: Max Baucus

Ranking Member, Committee on Finance

United States Senate



Arlen Specter

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

United States Senate



Pat Roberts

Chairman, Select Committee on Intelligence

United States Senate



James Sensenbrenner

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

U.S. House of Representatives



Pete Hoekstra

Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

U.S. House of Representatives



Congressman Rush Holt

U.S. House of Representatives



Robert S. Mueller, III

Director, Federal Bureau of Investigations

[NotGivingUp]

20. i would love to see all guilty parties get nailed

[fob]

21. Ah, we're finally getting around to the POST 911 terror attacks that

bush* didn't stop either.

We haven't been hit since 911 MY ASS!


Let the subpoenas begin!

[Sadie5]

22. Who are the repubs

who have suddenly turned over a new leaf?

[seemslikeadream]

23. I'm trying to find that out

:hi:

[seemslikeadream]

24. here's the letter with signatures

http://grassley.senate.gov/releases/2006/12122006.pdf

[DoYouEverWonder]

29. The Anthrax Attack was part of the 9-11 Attack

That's why Jerome Hauer warned the WH on 9-11 to start taking Cipro.

Hauer was also the 'brains' behind building Rudy's OEM bunker in WTC 7 and was the one who got John O'Neill his new job at the WTC and was with the one who 'found' his body in the rubble.

[bigluckyfeet]

30. Threaten to Take Some of the Money

away from thr FBI,that will get them moving.

[John Q. Citizen]

25. That's a start and I'm all for it. Maybe bush will appoint a commision to

review the whole incident and they can solve the crime for us, kinda like 9/11?

[depakid]

26. Seems to me that it's obvious that it came for someone on the far right

and that there's been cover-up.

[donkeyotay]

27. The words "FBI investigation" have become synonymous with cover-up

I guess they know who they work for, and it isn't the public or their representatives.

The F-B-I has refused to tell members of Congress about the probe, citing concerns about possible leaks.

As I recall FBI leaks were one reason congressional access to the NIE in 2002 before the war was restricted.

[seemslikeadream]

31. JEROME HAUER.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3389867#3401493

from bobthedrummer

48. It gets really interesting when you examine who was promoting Cipro use
immediately after 9/11 but well before any hint that there was an anthrax (specifically anthrax-that's what Cipro is for) or any other biological threat.

The mainmen on this were HHS Sect. Tommy Thompson and the fellow he had just hired from SAIC (on 9-10-2001!) JEROME HAUER.

Last I heard, Mr. Hauer was in charge of public bio-defense efforts.


At a minimum 9/11 was LIHOP. Why no arrests in the ANTHRAX attacks against media and Democrats that also killed and harmed a lot of innocent US Postal Service employees?????

Tommy Thompson stood around boasting of his negotiating skills with the former I.G. Farben company, BAYER, for 300 million doses of Cipro while US Postal Service employees were working in anthrax HOT ZONE's.

I'm just getting started about this as I live in Wisconsin and suffered under Tommy Thompson for many years. One of his real pals is Charles Murray, the American eugenicist that co-authored "The Bell Curve" and was hired by Tommy Thompson to help draft the Wisconsin Works/W2 welfare reform bill that has since been adopted as the Federal model for welfare reform.

These bastards cannot keep getting away with murder, they have names.
Keep naming them brother!

..............................


Posted by Octafish

Anthrax investigation still active. Why no mention of White House Cipro?

Strange that the White House volk were prescribed the antibiotic Cipro on 9-11, before the Anthrax attacks. Not that there's anything wrong with preventive medicine. Treason's another matter.

Anthrax investigation still ‘active’

FBI has not solved 2001 postal attacks.

Published Saturday, March 19, 2005

WASHINGTON (AP) - The anthrax false alarm this week served as a reminder that federal authorities still haven’t caught whoever was responsible for the all-too-real attacks in 2001 that left five people dead.

No arrests have been made, and no charges filed in the case the FBI has dubbed Amerithrax. Attorneys and scientists who have followed the investigation - and at times been touched by it - say they see no evidence of recent activity.

Debra Weierman, spokeswoman for the FBI’s Washington field office, disputed that. She said 30 FBI agents and 15 postal inspectors are assigned to the anthrax investigation, and more than 5,000 grand jury subpoenas have been issued.

"The investigation remains intensely active," Weierman said.

Steven Hatfill, the one person identified by former Attorney General John Ashcroft as a "person of interest" in the case, has filed suit against Ashcroft and the government, asserting they ruined his reputation. Hatfill has repeatedly said he had nothing to do with the anthrax-tainted letters that scared a jittery nation a month after the Sept. 11 attacks.

CONTINUED...

http://www.showmenews.com/2005/Mar/20050319News016.asp


White House began giving CIPRO to White House Aids on Sept 11

Tue, 23 Oct 2001 22:50:59 -0400

White House Mail Machine Has Anthrax

By Sandra Sobieraj
Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, Oct. 23, 2001; 8:11 p.m. EDT

WASHINGTON –– President Bush said confidently Tuesday that "I don't have anthrax" after biohazard testing at the White House and the discovery of anthrax on a mail-opening machine at a screening facility six miles away.

All White House mail – more than 40,000 letters a week – is examined at military facilities across the Potomac River.

"Let me put it this way," Bush said. "I'm confident that when I come to work tomorrow, I'll be safe."

Asked if he was tested for the germ that has killed three people already this month, or if he was taking precautionary antibiotics, Bush replied simply: "I don't have anthrax."

At least some White House personnel were given Cipro six weeks ago. White House officials won't discuss who might be receiving the anthrax-treating antibiotic now.

CONTINUED CACHE SOURCE...

http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/ip-health/2001-October/002225.html

Speaking of treason, what's up with the Secret Team biowarfare fart from Phoenix?


.................................




Jerome M. Hauer
Assistant Vice President, Science Applications International Corporation
Associate Director, Center for Counterterrorism Technology & Analysis

Jerome M. Hauer, one of the nation's leading experts on biological and chemical terrorism, recently left his post as Director of New York City's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) to join Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). Hauer, who served four years as the City's first OEM Director, will be SAIC's Assistant Vice President and Associate Director of Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis.

During his tenure at OEM, Hauer was charged by the Mayor with coordinating the City's on-scene response to multi-agency emergencies. He was also given the responsibility of drafting the City's emergency response plans to natural and man-made events, including hurricanes and coastal flooding, as well as biological or chemical attacks.

Hauer has a Masters degree from the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health and over 20 years of experience in emergency management. He was recently selected to be one of six scientists to brief President Clinton on biological terrorism and has been asked by the World Health Organization to co-author a rewrite of its 1970 monograph on chemical and biological weapons. Hauer consults regularly with Scotland Yard and the Israeli military, and worked extensively with the Australian Government in its preparations for the 2000 Summer Olympics.

Hauer has served on the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine's Committee to Evaluate R&D Needs for Improved Civilian Medical Response to Chemical or Biological Terrorism Incidents, and is an advisor the United States Capitol Police and the United States Marine Corps' Chemical-Biological Incident Response Force (C-BIRF). Hauer is also a member of the Johns Hopkins Working Group on Civilian Bio Defense, and is an advisor to the Department of Justice's Office of Justice Programs.
more
http://iml.dartmouth.edu/ists/hauer.html

The former director of New York’s Office of Emergency Management on what’s being done at ‘Ground Zero’Newsweek Web ExclusiveSept. 14 - Following the 1993 terrorist attack at the World Trade Center, Jerome M. Hauer was named the first-ever director and commissioner of the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM) for the City of New York. The office was designated as the center that would coordinate all agencies in times of crisis, and create its systems and protocols.

THE OEM DIRECTS the city’s overall emergency-response planning, as well as specialized planning for response to chemical, biological and nuclear-related incidents. Hauer also directed the design and implementation of New York City’s state-of-the-art Emergency Operations Center situated on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center, a bunker that went unused in the Tuesday’s explosions because of its proximity to the disaster (WTC 7 collapsed later that day).
more
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069634 /


Terror: Who is Jerome "Jerry" Hauer?

Jerome Hauer, Human Health Institute, is the man who put John O'Neill at the WTC and tipped the White House off to Cipro.
Very interesting stuff.....

"Very few cities at this point in time are prepared to manage the consequences of bio-terrorist attack."
Jerry Hauer in an interview with Eyewitness News, October 1, 2001

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/WABC_investigators_100101bioterror.html


In May 2002, Jerome Hauer became director of the federal Office of Public Health Preparedness (OPHP), succeeding Dr. D. A. Henderson from Johns Hopkins Institute.

Why is Jerome Hauer not making national news yet?

He's becoming famous on the Internet. Not only for Republicans, who appreciate his long fight against bioterrorism, which he started three to four years ago.

Hauer is also controversial among those who are able to connect the dots between his person and shady business deals in biopharmacy since 1998.

More interesting, he seems to have had prior knowledge about both so called terrorist-attacks: September 11th and Anthrax.

But many private investigators claim since months, he let the attacks happen on purpose to continue his career.

Is Hauer LIHOP suspect No.1?

He started to work for the NIH under Tommy Thompson on September 10, 2001 as an adviser on national security. On September 11th, he told the White House to take Cipro, the antibiotic that works against the anthrax virus, without bothering to reveal his warning to the American nation.
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/bayarea/living/health/302050 ...

The watchdog group JudicialWatch decided to file a lawsuit against the NIH, but also against the FBI, CDC and the White House, for the same reason: Prior Knowledge.

It is not known how long Hauer worked at the NIH before Sept. 11, but we can confirm that he was working on Sept. 10.
http://www.lauriegarrett.com/wtc_day12.html

But things get really interesting when we consider that Jerome Hauer was also the man who in August 2001 arranged a new job for John O'Neill - the resigning chief of the FBI Terror Task Force - as head of security at the World Trade Center.

How did Hauer know that the Twin Towers would be so important?

We would like to ask John O' Neill, but there is one problem: O'Neill died in the towers on September 11th, one day after he started his job officially, according to the New Yorker.

Disturbingly, O'Neill has never been received the same hero status in the mass media as has been accorded to the fallen New York firefighters and police officers. His death has gone without the same fanfare. For 11 months his story went untold, with two big exceptions.

The two French intelligence specialists Brisard and Dasquie (see: http://intelligenceonline.fr ) published an interview with O'Neill taken before his death in their book, "Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth." And articles on O'Neill were also published in the New Yorker and New York Magazine. Last week, TIME magazine also tried to remember him, but left out the most important angles.

This should change immediately.

There is obviously a lot which has been hidden from us, but for what reason?

This might have something to do with the FBI HQ (O'Neill complained about them), but also with Jerome Hauer - who is a friend of the current prime anthrax suspect, Stephen Hatfill, who was working for the military anthrax program USAMRIID at Fort Detrick and Battelle, a huge pharmacy company with many ties to the CIA.

Hauer and Hatfill worked together at the SAIC's Center for Counterterrorism Technology and Analysis in 1999. The SAIC (Scientific Applications International Corp) later received also a huge BioDefense budget in autumn 2001.

http://www.saic.com/news/nov99/news11-30a-99.html - (Hauer)
http://www.nandotimes.com/nation/story/455218p-3643441c ... - (Hatfill)

But first, more about Hauer:

In 1983, Hauer joined IBM where he was responsible for the company's Hazardous Materials Response and Crisis Management and Fire Safety programs. Hauer produced a series of hazardous materials training videos that earned him the International Film andTV Critics of New York Bronze award in 1986.

In the early 1990s, Hauer got his first contacts to military and biodefense.

Hauer received a master's degree in emergency medical services from the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health. Then he became member of the Johns Hopkins Working Group on Civilian Bio Defense, where he wrote various articles about a possible bioterrorist attack.
http://iml.dartmouth.edu/ists/hauer.html

In 1998, he started working at the OEM (Office for Emergency Management) in New York.

In the same year, Hauer and anthrax suspect Hatfill both supported the CFR as experts in their respective fields. The CFR is an acronym for Council on Foreign Relations, one of the most important think-tanks advising the US government, as well as many other governments abroad.

CFR members include the Pentagon's top advisers, Richard Perle, Henry Kissinger, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, ex-CIA chief James Woolsey, biosciences specialist Joshua Lederberg, and many others.

On May 28, 1998, Hatfill and Hauer spoke together at the same CFR meeting about "Building a 'Biobomb': Terrorist Challenge"
http://www.cfr.org/public/resource.cgi?meet!102

Hatfill was at that time also Senior Research Associate at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases (=USAMRIID)

Hauer seems to specialize in the art of holding down several different jobs at the same time. While he started to work for the NIH in September 2001, he remained a Managing Director at Kroll Associates - the official security and bodyguard company for all American presidents since World War II!

With Hauer's many sources of insider information (e.g. Kroll/President bodyguards) , it makes sense that he also knew about the CIA briefing for George Bush on August 6, 2001, about warnings of an imminent terrorist "attack with planes."

Hauer is still trying to save the world.

On November 6th, 2001 he participated in the "Independent Task Force on America's Response to Terrorism" at the CFR. Participants there included James J. Zogby (President of the Arab American Institute and Central Asian Enterprise Fund), Newton L. Gingrich (Chief Executive Officer, The Gingrich Group), Harold Brown (former secretary of defense and counselor at CSIS: the Center for Strategic and International Studies), Henry A. Kissinger (Senior Fellow in National Security and European Affairs), Richard C. Holbrooke (Counselor, CFR and Vice Chairman of Perseus, LLC) and Philip A. Odeen (Executive Vice President, Washington Operations of TRW, Inc. and CEO of Reynolds + Reynolds, Dayton).

Their agenda, eight weeks after the attack of Sept. 11, was strange indeed:
http://www.cfr.org/Public/publications/PubDiplom_TF.htm ...

[Judi Lynn]

32. Thanks for reposting this. Missed it the first time. Looking forward to studying it. n/t