Bruce Ivins and Squalene

The main discussion, which salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald is spearheading, centres around:

• The fact that ABC News consistently reported (based on alleged tests at Fort Detrick) that the anthrax contained bentonite, which implicated Iraq and Saddam Hussein in its manufacture, when in fact it did not; the bentonite story was a complete and unsubstantiated fabrication, and ABC News has never questioned why their ‘government sources’ fed them this false information, and has declined to identify them.
• The fact that Ivins was not charged (the person who was implicated, wrongly, another Fort Detrick scientist named Stephen Hatfill, successfully sued the US government for millions of dollars for defamation) or even publicly discussed as a person of interest before his ‘suicide’, despite the fact he was apparently about to face a mental competency hearing, and had a history of writing bizarre letters to newspapers.
• The fact that leading journalists were advised by high government sources to take the anti-toxin Cipro before the anthrax attacks.
• The fact that the link between anthrax and Iraq may have provided the ‘tipping point’ in moving media and public opinion to the point where Bush could attack Iraq without a firestorm of protest.

It should be stressed here that Ivins may not have been guilty. His lawyer and family say he’s innocent. He’s been accused by the US government and was about to face charges, but who’s to say he’s not just the latest scapegoat now that Hatfill’s name has been cleared? I’ve said before that I’m astonished that so little progress has been made in finding out who was behind it. It’s all just too convenient, coming on the heels of 9/11 with a government that had already decided to attack Iraq and was simply looking for a pretext.

This alone should be enough to cause even the most cautious citizen to suspect that the government was either complicit in, or cynically and deliberately dishonest in exploiting, the anthrax attacks.

But there’s more. Google Bruce Ivins’ name and you’ll find a lot of discussion about an oil called squalene. Google his name and squalene together and what comes up is interesting.

Squalene was used in anthrax vaccines given to US (and other nations’) troops in the Middle East. US troops were, according to this book and a lot of veterans groups, and at least one clinical study, used as guinea pigs to test this oil, which was not authorized for use on humans because of identified dangers and side-effects: There is compelling evidence that squalene causes crippling permanent autoimmune diseases. But by pumping the autoimmune system it also dramatically improves the effectiveness of vaccines in the short term. The man who fought to have squalene tested on humans, and got his wish when the US sent troops to Iraq, was, according to Gary Matsumoto’s book — Bruce Ivins.

I’m not saying he’s guilty. But, just for a moment, imagine you’re an unhinged scientist trying to get your dream vaccine cocktail tested on humans when everyone else is saying it’s too dangerous, and you’re something of a Christian fanatic. What better way to do it than to send anthrax (that you have access to) through the mails to incite panic and a war against Islam?

Ivins had method and opportunity and, it would seem, motive. If this is true, it’s a motive the US Government never wanted the public to hear about. That’s perhaps why they didn’t arrest him alive. His ‘suicide’ lets them try to bury the story.

And if it’s not true, as at least one long-time studier of the anthrax letters maintains, and Ivins was just hounded to death by government investigators determined to pin this on someone before the November elections, that raises even more questions:

• Why haven’t authorities, having spent millions of dollars, including a lot spent on the wild goose chase after Hatfill, been able to even identify the source of the anthrax? Is it mere incompetence, or are they being deliberately put off the trail, and if so, by whom?
• Why was Ivins made the fall guy? Is it that he was emotionally weak and financially vulnerable? 

Fascinating. Stay tuned.