Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Apparent Suicide In Anthrax Case

Posted by kdawson on Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:12 PM
from the tylenol-and-codeine dept.
penguin_dance passes along the news that a respected anthrax researcher, about to be indicted, has committed suicide. The FBI has been investigating the case since anthrax-contaminated letters were sent to the media and various politicians in 2001. The AP's coverage mentions that prosecutors intended to seek the death penalty. The suicide was not the one you might imagine if you've been following the story. "A top government scientist who helped the FBI analyze samples from the 2001 anthrax attacks has died in Maryland from an apparent suicide, just as the Justice Department was about to file criminal charges against him for the attacks, the Los Angeles Times has learned. Bruce E. Ivins, 62, who for the last 18 years worked at the government's elite biodefense research laboratories at Ft. Detrick, Md., had been informed of his impending prosecution... The extraordinary turn of events followed the government's payment in June of a settlement valued at $5.82 million to a former government scientist, Steven J. Hatfill, who was long targeted as the FBI's chief suspect despite a lack of any evidence that he had ever possessed anthrax."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Anthrax To Kill Snail Mail 522 comments
omnirealm writes "Steven Levy over at NBC expressed his opinion that the new anthrax thread in our snail-mail is going to be a major catalyst to a general switch to e-mail as the primary means of written communication."
[+] FBI Seizes Library Computers Without Warrant 483 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Two FBI agents walked into a public library in Maryland, without a warrant, and walked out with two computers. The library director agreed to release the machines to these smooth-talking feds. According to the article, the director of Frederick County Public Libraries indicated that this was the third time in his 10 years there that the FBI had requested records, but the first time they had come without a court order. The director seemed to indicate no regrets, stating 'It was a decision I made on my experience and the information given to me.' He further justified his actions, noting that the agents indicated specific computers they needed (of the several dozen in the library) and further that they 'had an awful lot of information.'" The library director speculated whether the raid may have involved the Bruce Ivins / anthrax case, musing "Obviously it coincided with the events everyone is talking about," but he said the agents hadn't mentioned it.
[+] Science: New Scientific Evidence Emerges In Anthrax Case 216 comments
sciencehabit writes "A Science Magazine investigation uses clues from a key document unveiled last week to reconstruct the trail that led the FBI to Bruce Ivins. Among the revelations: Anthrax fingerprinting was not critical to the investigation, as many reports have suggested. Rather, brute-force genetic sequencing, with the help of the J. Craig Venter Institute, helped crack the case. New potential motivations by Ivins are also revealed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Oh, the irony (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sm62704 (957197) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:21PM (#24436535) Journal

    A suicidal man getting the death penalty. If I rob a bank will they give me double the amount of the cash I steal?

    When I die it will likely be a horrible death, like most people - cancer, heart disease, accident, violence, falling down in a nursing home, alzheimers, etc.

    But a murderer gets euthanized, like a beloved pet is put down.

    I want murderers to spend the rest of their lives horribly and end horribly, like most of us non criminals. I don't mind my tax money going to incarceration of violent people, but I do mind my government murdering in my name. We should join the civilized world and stop executing people.

    • Re:Oh, the irony (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mpapet (761907) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:34PM (#24436769) Homepage

      I want murderers to spend the rest of their lives horribly and end horribly

      You conveniently ignore the fact that the law-enforcement system wrongly incarcerates many people, murderers included. We'll ignore your distopian ideal until they fix that glaring issue.

      Given the overall tone of your post, may I suggest making some changes in your life to introduce a bit more positive attitude?

      • Re:Oh, the irony (Score:5, Insightful)

        by arth1 (260657) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:46PM (#24436985) Homepage Journal

        Civilized people deserve civilized treatment. I guess that just about wraps it up.

        I think you mean "Civilized people give civilized treatment". Otherwise, what marks them as civilized? Anyone can treat their own well - it's also treating those who are different that makes us a civilization and not a tribe.

          • Re:Oh, the irony (Score:5, Insightful)

            by arth1 (260657) on Friday August 01 2008, @03:21PM (#24440099) Homepage Journal

            Jeffery Dalhmer, for example. He couldn't function in prison either. What exactly do we do with people like that? It has nothing to do with the "expense" of a life sentance. It has everything to do with the safety and wellbeing of the fellow prisoners and guards.

            No, it doesn't. It has everything to do with the safety and wellbeing of the fellow prisoners, guards and Jeffrey Dahmer. Once you don't give him the same human rights as others, you're no longer acting civilized. Whether he himself has broken those rights is irrelevant -- our ability to not let that be a factor in how we treat him is what makes us civilized and unlike him.

            If you let who people are decide whether you treat them with respect, you will quickly polarize the society into "those like us" and "those unlike us", and you'll be back to a tribal society, not a civilization. We're on the path there, I'm afraid.

            • Re:Oh, the irony (Score:4, Interesting)

              by slew (2918) on Friday August 01 2008, @09:01PM (#24443795)

              If you let who people are decide whether you treat them with respect, you will quickly polarize the society into "those like us" and "those unlike us", and you'll be back to a tribal society, not a civilization. We're on the path there, I'm afraid.

              Sadly, I doubt there is a society or a subset of society that ever existed which is civilized under your definition. Starting in kindergarden/gradeschool society, we are essentially taught that some people are worth treating with respect, and some are not (e.g., ones who follow rules are to be respected, ones that don't are shamed). Later on people who follow the rules are not respected, and the rule-breakers are admired. Then it's people who are good at sports, or math, or skateboard or use computers or have girlfriends or boyfriends or have a job, or have been on a cruise, or been to europe, or been to vietnam, or are married, or have kids or have grandkids or coloring your hair or just happen to be in the opposite set which are the complement of these things.

              Societies are generally always structured into the conforming and the non-conforming outsiders. Generally the non-conforming outsiders usually get no respect or in many cases no rights at all (for example that will most certainly date me, on early usenet, some sites didn't allow newbies to post at all). The "in" crowd makes the rules, generally to differentiate them from the "outsiders" and create the exclusion set. More often than not, the rules also make provisions for transitioning members from the inclusion set to the exclusion set (e.g., excommunication, shunning, banning, blocking, voting-out, etc).

              Although it's just a matter of degree, I doubt being 100% "civilized" by your definition would ever the goal of any actual society, lest they let the outsiders in and ruin it ;^)

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Actually, he would be tried, there would be an appeal, a new trial, another appeal, an appeal of the appeal, a sentencing, and appeal of the sentencing, and appeal of the appeal to the sentencing, an appeal to the SCOTUS, a lobbying effort at the state level to ban execution, a lobbying effort at the federal level to ban execution, pleas to the Governor and President to get his execution stayed, etc...

        So that eventually, after 20+ years and millions upon millions of tax payer dollars are wasted, he might ge

  • by bsharma (577257) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:22PM (#24436553)
    "...injury is deliberately and gradually inflicted upon a person usually for gaining attention or some other benefit." He might have wanted his research to be better recognized and useful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munchausen_syndrome_by_proxy [wikipedia.org]
  • by John Jorsett (171560) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:22PM (#24436557)

    I've grown increasingly cynical about government in recent years. I wonder, did the feds see that this guy knocked himself off and think, "Hey, here's a perfect target we can accuse and use to divert attention from the Hatfill mess and the fact that we haven't found anybody in 6 years."? Not saying that happened, but it's telling that it was the first thing that went through my mind when I heard this.

    • by rpillala (583965) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:42PM (#24436929)

      This doesn't directly address your question, but there's a great deal more to this story: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/index.html [salon.com]

    • by demachina (71715) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:29PM (#24438973)

      You also have to worry that he was involved but that he had co-conspirators and his suicide may prevent the investigation from getting to them.

      There is also the possibility the co-conspirators stood with a gun to his head and forced him to swallow the over dose so he would be the fall guy and would have no chance to expose them in exchange for a plea deal.

      You hate to think your government would have perpetrated the Anthrax attacks on purpose to amplify the fear after 9/11 and insure the country would support invading Iraq, but everything that's been unveiled about the Bush Administration in the last few years you KNOW they are ruthless enough and may well have been willing to do such a thing to get their way, and seem to have a pretty low regard for the rule of law or the value of human life. Addington in Cheney's office in particular seem to be capable of just about any kind of atrocity. It appears he almost single handedly pushed the U.S. in to torturing people.

      I find it a little odd the FBI would have been quite as blatant as they were in tipping their hand to him that he was going to be charged, going to be charged with murder and he might get the death penalty. Its kind of like they were trying to force him to either flee or kill himself.

  • by jgarra23 (1109651) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:24PM (#24436587)

    Shouldn't they confirm through investigative work that he did in fact commit these crimes rather than just assume since they were about to file charges & that he "committed suicide" that he did it? IT seems like poor reasoning on anyone's part to just assume this is the logical conclusion just because he offed himself before shit hit the fan. What if the suicide was for some completely different reason? Lots of people commit suicide for reasons other than legal troubles.

    • by topham (32406) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:35PM (#24436779) Homepage

      What? You mean it might be possible that a depressed individual, accused of a crime, might commit suicide because of the pressure of the situation, and not guilt over getting caught? What!?

      The FBI has obviously repeatedly targeted people without sufficient evidence in this case. Obviously the guys life would be ruined, guilt or innocence be damned.

  • He just accidentally mixed up his crack and his research material.
  • by IronChef (164482) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:25PM (#24436609) Homepage

    Maybe this guy is innocent and when he saw the hell that Hatfill went through, he decided he'd rather check out instead.

    Just kidding! ... but not really.

  • by chaffed (672859) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:29PM (#24436667) Homepage

    What's the best way to maintain plausible deniability [wikipedia.org]? Kill the person who actually committed the crime. Your patsy does the dirty work, then you dispose of them.

  • by wherrera (235520) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:29PM (#24436669)

    Unfortunately unless he wrote a confession note it's possible that he was simply depressed and the news of being prosecuted as his co-worker was acted as a last impetus to suicide. TIme will tell I suppose.

  • Terrorism (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mattpm (1135875) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:35PM (#24436789)
    But Dubya told me the terrorists were in Iraq!?!
  • by dlgeek (1065796) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:36PM (#24436811)
    Apparently he helped the FBI in analyzing the samples in the initial investigation. TFA says the investigation shifted focus in 2006 and

    Moreover, significant progress was made in analyzing genetic properties of the anthrax powder recovered from letters addressed to two senators.

    I wonder if he faked his analysis and used it to frame Hatfill (the guy the Government had announced as a person of interest, sued the NYTimes and the Justice Dept. for libel and got a big settlement from the later) Also from TFA:

    Soon after the government's settlement with Hatfill was announced June 27, Ivins began showing signs of serious strain.

    Maybe he knew they were closing in on him?

  • by Jeff1946 (944062) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:38PM (#24436853) Journal

    Salon has a updated story today http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/ [salon.com]
    relating to false information provided to ABC news early on about the investigation. Really makes you wonder what was going on here.

    • I don't really wonder what was going on when three or four "well-placed sources" claimed that government tests had linked the anthrax to Saddam. Just toss the deceit on the pile; I think there's some space in between the "Smoking Gun Mushroom Cloud" and the "Mobile Biological Weapons Laboratories".

      What I wonder about is:

      Why hasn't ABC outed the people who lied to them?

      Why is Glenn Greenwald the only person who seems to care that ABC is protecting government insiders who lied about anthrax attacks?

  • by MikeRT (947531) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:47PM (#24437007) Homepage
    The media and the FBI are a combination made in hell for law and order and justice. Just ask Hatfill and Richard Jewell [wikipedia.org] among many others. There's nothing quite like getting convicted in the court of public opinion thanks to the media for making the FBI's job easier, and there's nothing like a high profile FBI investigation to make a story for the media...
  • Clueless FBI (Score:5, Insightful)

    by philspear (1142299) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:52PM (#24437111)

    The article was, predictably, poor in science, but it sounds like the reason the FBI suspected him was that there was an anthrax contamination that he bleached but didn't report and didn't recheck to be sure nothing survived.

    While that would have been a good step to take, anthrax microbes by themselves aren't harmful, in order to be a weapon it needs to be processed. Purified anthrax spores are what will send you to the hospital. I don't know how that's done, but the point is that anthrax growing on your lab bench is not the same as having plutonium all over your lab bench. Anthrax bacterial contamination in a fume hood would be an annoyance, not a serious safety issue.

    Furthermore, bleach is a heavy duty sterilizing agent. You douse your bench in bleach and you really don't have to worry about residual contamination in most cases. Reswabbing is easy to do and would have been the right thing to do, but it's understandable that he didn't: it's kind of like checking for a pulse in someone you just burned at the stake.

    We're of course not getting the full story, and it's more suspicious that his house was in the area the letters were coming from, but from what the article is saying, it sounds like the FBI may have harassed a man into suicide over "evidence" that would have been dismissed as unimportant if it were put into context.

    • Re:Clueless FBI (Score:4, Interesting)

      by R2.0 (532027) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:26PM (#24437661)

      Yes, but an "accidental" contamination is a good cover for an intentional removal of samples to weaponize elsewhere. So they find spores outside of containment in your lab? "Oh, I had an accidental release a month ago - I got it right away with bleach, so I didn't botehr reporting it. Must have missed some."

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 01 2008, @01:07PM (#24437335)

    Before everyone runs off and drinks yet some more governmental press release kool aid, apply some normal flatfoot 101 to this situation, use a clean slate.

    Look at who got the mailings, and when they got the mailings, and what was coincidently in the news at the same time, to establish a probable motive. Also note the "cover letters" which were meant to cast blame on "islamic terrorists", with a lot of death to the infidels and america and israel, etc nonsense written in pidgin misspelled english.

    who = news media sources, and two *important* high ranking Dem senators. The first news media source, the tabloid writer in florida, who was infected and later died, is a wildcard, no ties whatsoever with the others for any apparent motive, except one. He was working on a story that dealt with a leadership position in a tangential way, something that would have embarrassed some powerful people. The other newsies were top dogs in their fields, meaning they have huge propaganda influence. Some of the letters were mailed, some hand delivered, but no one is saying by whom, this has never been publicly determined.

    when and what = right before debate on the Patriot Act. How coincidental. congress gets shut down, hysteria in the news headlines, anthrax mailings happen, made to look like Abdul J. Jihad did it, patriot act passed easily, despite overwhelming and clearly just plain wrong big brother aspects to it.

    So maybe he did it, maybe not, but there are some juicy bits there to think about. Maybe he was meant to be a patsy and fall guy, after first getting his cooperation by enlisiting his sense of "patriotism" and telling him "sometimes you have to crack a few eggs to make an omelet" or call it "unfortunate collateral damage, but the strike had to be done". Maybe he was a manchurian brainwashed asset, maybe....but the timing and targets will remain highly suspicious, especially because of the obvious attempt at misdirection and the tremendous political and economic gains to be had by changing the direction of the US in a huge way. And there's your few trillion dollars in motive, along with control of the most powerful government on the planet, and the direction of mideast geopolitical and energy ppolicy, and increasing daily.

    Next question: Who profits? Add it up.

  • I can relate... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Joseph Hayes (982018) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:26PM (#24438895)
    As someone that got his dick caught in a door by some cops using very very shady maneuvers.... The government zealously threatening to ruin your life as you know it can easily lead you to thoughts of suicide. I went as far as carrying a bottle of carbon monoxide and mask around in the spare tire compartment of my car in case things went south quickly during the legal process. I was not about to become someone's bitch for something I didn't even do, and apparently neither was Dr. Ivin. I honestly can't blame him. When I was in that situation suicide seemed like the wisest thing TO do considering how my life would be after going thru the prison system. I kept thinking that if I didn't kill myself now, I'd be sitting in prison, innocent!, and wishing I had. Luckily, I guess you could say, I was able to pay a lawyer THOUSANDS of dollars to eventually get the case thrown out on entrapment (after a year and a half of HELL). When you are a good person and get in a sticky situation with the chips stacked against you.... you mental health turns to the dark side rather quickly. May he rest in peace.
      • Beat himself to death, with the blunt end of an axe?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Newer rule: Anyone posting suggestions for changes to slashdot's moderation system must not post as AC.
        • You must be new here.

          1. The guy was joking
          2. Most slashdot summaries are all one needs to comment
          3. Many links in slashdot summaries lead to stupid blogs, or sites with fifteen one paragraph ad laden pages. Often the summary is superior to the article.
          4. Many links in slashdot summaries don't say anything more than the summary does
          5. Who the fuck gives an anonymous coward the right to make up rules as to how the rest of us should moderate? If you were a /. admin then you would have identified yourself and p

    • by LaskoVortex (1153471) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:38PM (#24436849)

      Huh, funny. But he was a terrorist, right?

      Maybe a relevant question is to ask his political affiliations. The contaminated mail was sent to Democrat Senators. You decide.

      • by faloi (738831) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:01PM (#24437235)
        It was to the Senate Majority Leader and the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that happened to be Democrats. Maybe it was because of their positions of power within the Senate? Maybe he was an anarchist that saw a great opportunity to sow the seeds of confusion and fear? Maybe he was a Bildeberger neo-con front man determined to make sure that the PATRIOT act got passed to usher in a New World Order by eliminating two prominent opponents? Maybe he was just a nut case with an axe to grind that saw an opportunity to get at a couple of people that "wronged" him in the aftermath of a terrorist act?

        If you look hard enough for conspiracies, you'll find them. They may not really be there, but it's pretty darn hard to prove something doesn't exist.
          • by faloi (738831) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:34PM (#24437781)
            Actualy... No.

            However, when Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont announced in May 2001 that he was leaving the Republican caucus to become an independent and would caucus with Democrats, this returned control of the body to the Democrats and Daschle again became Majority Leader.

            He was the Majority Leader during the anthrax attack because a Republican changed party affiliation and Daschle was the leader.
        • Why wait? (Score:4, Interesting)

          by SpaceLifeForm (228190) on Friday August 01 2008, @03:39PM (#24440371)
          In the hopes that people would forget that the bush administration tied the anthrax to Iraq.

          If you check out the spin in the headlines [google.com] , you can already tell that they are trying to convict the dead guy for carrying out the attacks.

          In a couple of days or so, they will spin it all as 'case closed', in the hope that everyone forgets the real story.

          If the guy had been 'suicided' too early, that would have taken away the talking point that Iraq was behind the anthrax attacks.

          Now, that the bush administration has declared 'mission accomplished', it may have been time to clean up loose ends.

          </tinfoil>

    • Motive? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jtcm (452335) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:39PM (#24436861)

      There's no mention of any potential motive for a "top government scientist" to start mailing anthrax.

      Why did he (allegedly) do it? Why did it occur in the month following 9/11? What was his relation to the 9/11 terrorists [wikipedia.org]?

      Bruce E. Ivins doesn't sound like a Muslim name. Did he have any friends or relatives in the Middle East? I'm disappointed that TFA doesn't address any of these questions. I wonder if they'll ever be answered.

      • Re:Motive? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Remus Shepherd (32833) <remus@panix.com> on Friday August 01 2008, @01:01PM (#24437243) Homepage

        There's no mention of any potential motive for a "top government scientist" to start mailing anthrax.

        And yet all the suspects were top US government scientists.

        Face it -- this terrorist attack came from a US citizen. Anthrax is hard to weaponize, and a US source was always the most likely origin.

        The perpetrator probably had no relation to 9/11, or Iraq. In fact, his agenda may have been to increase domestic tensions to incite our invasion of Iraq. (Witness the spurious mention of bentonite, which was known to be an Iraqi addition to anthrax agents. It was not in the mailed anthrax, but plenty of news sources reported incorrectly that it was.) He might not have had any agenda; Ivins was obviously mentally ill.

        No, sadly, I don't think these questions will ever be answered.

        • Re:Motive? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Frnknstn (663642) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:57PM (#24438275) Homepage

          Ivins was obviously mentally ill.

          Obviously? How do you figure that? All we know is that a dude who was sane enough for the FBI to work with for many months is now dead. Suicide has not been proved, and even suicide does not prove mental illness. Guilt has not been proved, and neither was the man ever formally charged. There is very little we know about this incident, and it is irresponsible of you to claim that anything is 'obvious' at this juncture.

          • Re:Motive? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Remus Shepherd (32833) <remus@panix.com> on Friday August 01 2008, @02:32PM (#24439045) Homepage

            Read the article. He was going to a shrink for years, and admitted to thoughts of suicide. He died from an overdose of prescription medication. I think 'obviously mentally ill' is a valid supposition.

            Whether he was guilty or not is another matter. That's why I used 'the perpetrator' in my post above.

      • Re:Motive? (Score:5, Funny)

        by ofcourseyouare (965770) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:07PM (#24437327)
        Did he have any friends or relatives in the Middle East?
        Indeed he did - from TFA:
        "Ivins, the son of a Princeton-educated pharmacist, was born and raised in Lebanon"
        ...though if you're going to be pedantic that should be...
        "Ivins, the son of a Princeton-educated pharmacist, was born and raised in Lebanon, Ohio"
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I remember reading some analytical piece back in Fall 01 speculating about the motive. It was saying that the source was most likely from the defense industry, and so whoever sent it may have been trying to show how vulnerable we are to chemical attacks. It may have been a desperate attempt to get the kind of chemical/biological defense measures in place the sender was trying to implement in other ways.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Some of these Questions are kind of answered in this article: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/index.html [salon.com] It's the same as with Saddam Husseins WMDs or his link Al Quaida. Your Government and your Media lied to you.
          • Re:Motive? (Score:5, Interesting)

            by NorQue (1000887) on Friday August 01 2008, @02:36PM (#24439153)
            Most of the time you're right. But in this special case, the one that Glenn Greenwald outlines, which involves those sources that confirm the Anthrax link to Iraq to ABC, someone lied. Either the Reporter who made up those sources, or the Sources themselves. It's hard to explain away this case with incompetence. I'd love to hear an explanation from ABC for that.
      • Re:Motive? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Art Deco (529557) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:38PM (#24437851)
        One doesn't need to be Muslim to be a terrorist. Timothy McVeigh was a Christian. The terrorists who assassinate doctors who perform abortions are Christians. Wikipedia says Bruce E. Ivins was a Roman Catholic. Terrorists can be any religion.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Given that this has been a headline for at least 12 hours now, I did some reading.

        A motive that was given in this news account [sfgate.com]
        was that he was working on a vaccine for Anthrax and wanted to test it.

        There was also some evidence that before the 2001 anthrax attack, he had conducted tests outside of normal work protocol. His attorney stated that he had been cooperating with the FBI for more than a year. There is also a report that he was forcibly removed from his job due to his becoming unstable.

        The impressio

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      He didnt do it, for those who havent been following-

      1. Ft. Detrick doesnt have the weaponization capability.

      2. Illegal (i.e. violates the Biological Weapons Convention [wikipedia.org]) U.S. offensive anthrax weaponization is run out of Battelle Memorial Institute under Project Jefferson under the DIA.

      3. The Anthrax letters were a copy of the CIA operation that used anthrax substitute in their tests.

      4. The DIA comes under the DoD, the CIA under the White House, the only place those two mandates meet is at the pleasure of PO

    • by T.E.D. (34228) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:43PM (#24436949)

      I fail to see how this is relevant to the general slashdot content

      You may not have noticed the icons at the top of the story, but this was classified under "Government", "Biotech", and "Science". I think rightly in all 3 cases.

      You could perhaps make a case for the argument that the "Government" stuff should not be on slashdot, but the other two categories certianly belong here.

      I'd argue you the first one too though. Politics is most assuredly "stuff that matters". And if you don't think political people are "nerds", you clearly have never heard Markos (of DailyKos) speak.

    • by ShibaInu (694434) on Friday August 01 2008, @12:48PM (#24437033)

      Let's see - this is about a mysterious case involving weaponized anthrax that had to be developed by someone with pretty specific technical knowledge. Futhermore, it involves the FBI, DOD biological weapons labs, conspiracy theories, etc. Seems to me to be pretty geeky.

      Don't like it - don't read it.

    • Re:in this thread (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Chris Burke (6130) on Friday August 01 2008, @01:45PM (#24438001) Homepage

      Um... you do realize that if this guy was responsible, that means that the anthrax came from inside one of the top anthrax researchers in a Army-run facility, sent with a clear intent to link the anthrax with Islamic terrorism in the wake of 9/11?

      And if he didn't do it, what does that mean about the FBI investigation?

      There is no good option here.

      however, rabid, paranoid schizophrenic musings on all evil in the world falling at the government's doorstep

      Oh. I recognize this strawman. Nevermind.