ANTHRAX - Disputes FBI's profile of anthrax culprit

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Current News - Homefront Preparations : One Thread

Austin American-Statesman

Expert disputes FBI's profile of anthrax culprit

By Eunice Moscoso Washington Staff Thursday, December 6, 2001

WASHINGTON -- A biological warfare expert, summoned to testify before Congress on Wednesday, disputed the FBI's theory that a loner with a scientific background is likely to blame for the anthrax attacks.

"That's a lot of hokum," said Richard Spertzel, who formerly headed biological weapons inspections for the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq.

"I don't believe that material was made by some nut," he said. "It's not the kind of thing you mess with in a university laboratory . . . The level of knowledge, expertise and experience required . . . to make such a quality product takes time and experimentation to develop."

Spertzel made the remarks to reporters during a break in the hearing.

During his testimony, he said that the anthrax that has killed five people was probably produced by a group involved with a current or former state program, such as Iraq's.

"Iraq has the equipment, facilities, material and expertise to have an active biological weapons program," he told the House Committee on International Relations. Iraq could still have anthrax spores that "would still be viable and pose a significant risk," he said.

In addition, he said that the nature of the anthrax found in the letter to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is such that an individual would have needed safety equipment and facilities to protect himself and elude discovery.

If an individual had developed the anthrax, there would have been spores "all over the place" and others around him would have become infected by now, he said.

Bill Carter, an FBI spokesman, said the bureau stands by its profile.

"We're not ruling anything in or out at this time, but based on the analysis of the letters, done in consultation with the investigators, this is the ongoing belief of who the person might be," he said.

The FBI describes the perpetrator as a "nonconfrontational person" who, if employed, is likely to be in a job that requires little contact with the public. They also said the profile is similar to that of other offenders who send dangerous materials through the mail, including Ted Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, who built intricate bombs in his Montana hideaway and eluded capture for years.

The equipment needed to develop the anthrax in the letters could cost as little as $2,500, the FBI said.

At the hearing, some lawmakers disputed the FBI theory that the anthrax outbreaks are not related to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

It would take "an unbelievable degree of naivete to believe that these two events just happened to coincide," said Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif..

Lantos also blasted Iraq for not allowing U.N. weapons inspectors into that country for three years.

"Unless there is a fundamental change in Iraq's government and Saddam Hussein is gone . . . military action may soon be required," he said.

-- Anonymous, December 06, 2001

Answers

I guess I'll have to straighten these folks out, they're all at least partially wrong.

Spertzel: "...the anthrax that has killed five people was probably produced by a group involved with a current or former state program, such as Iraq's." I agree that it was probably produced by group (or individual) involved with a current or former state program. I don't think the anthrax scare was directly related to 9/11, but either way it would have had to be in the country as of 9/11 which points more to a U.S. current or former state program. Note that Spertzel is trying to call attention to a foreign bioterrorism threat, which is specifically the message I think was intended.

"It would take "an unbelievable degree of naivete to believe that these two events just happened to coincide..." Only unbelievable if the person who distributed the anthrax didn't already have the anthrax available and some preconceived ideas about what one would do.

-- Anonymous, December 06, 2001


Moderation questions? read the FAQ