CNN Finds Addiction Counselor Who Says She ‘Knows’ Ivins Was Anthrax Killer

There has been a lot of skepticism about the FBI’s closure of the 2001 anthrax terror scare, led perhaps by Bob Coen & Eric Nadler, authors of Dead Silence: Fear and Terror on the Anthrax Trail. Now CNN is running a video questioning the state of Dr. Bruce Ivins’ mind, suggesting strongly that it was definitely Ivins who was behind the anthrax attacks. Is this is a case of the major media helping out the government?

, , , , ,

  • 5by5

    My first question – Who the hell is this chick?

    My second question – What in flipping hell does his sex life have to do with whether or not the man was technically capable of creating highly aerosolized weapons-grade anthrax on his own?

    My third question – Did he buy or did he “make” a bullet proof vest? Because she weirdly claims he said both in the same sentence.

    My fourth question – She'd only been seeing him for six months? Presumably six months in which the FBI had already begun it's pursuit and harassment of this guy, so that would make him naturally testy, perhaps even with fantasies of lashing out at his harassers, however that's not the same as acting on them. And without a control – a metric of what he was like NOT under stress, how could she properly evaluate his mental health?

    Sorry, but this lady doesn't strike me as the least bit credible. I get a serious bullshit vibe from her.

    You notice as well how in the voiceover, the interviewer only gives us one other possibility – that a “foreign terrorist organization” might have done it? As if that's our only other choice?

    And then her answer is, “Well why would he pick these specific people?”

    That's the first semi-intelligent question she's asked.

    Why WOULD the only targets of this be the Liberal Senator leading the committee with jurisdiction over passage of the Patriot Act, the leader of the Democrats in the House, and some of the few Liberal media hosts on television who might report that the excuse for the upcoming Iraq War was BS, and that the provisions of the Patriot Act were fascist crap?

    Gee, maybe somebody – somebody who'd later tell that same committee chairman on the floor of the Senate to “Go fuck himself” – maybe that somebody was sending a message that if their draconian measures like the Patriot Act DIDN'T pass, that there would be “accidents.”

    Feels very “sleeps with the fishes” to me. Also feels like Cheney's “style”.

    Now THAT guy? I could very EASILY see him sending anthrax to his enemies. That's a guy who gets drunk and shoots his FRIENDS in the face.

    • typewriter1

      You ask who she is. I think that’s pretty clear. She was his addictions counselor at a treatment facility. What does she have to be deceptive about? “A serious bullshit vibe.” you say. What exactly would you say is her motivation for making up anything? Her story has not changed since the beginning.

      She called the FBI because she was concerned about what he would do and that seems honest and straightforward to me. He made serious threats and if she had not reported them then she would not have been doing her job. Her concerns proved to be legitimate. If you mean she is not a terribly credentialed professional you are correct. But then there is a group of very credentialed profilers who have also concluded that he was the one who did it and I have a feeling you would discredit them as well, based on some conspiracy theories which appear to be popular online. (Firedog Lake, etc.) I think you are attacking her because she doesn’t fit in with your theories. She is critical of the FBI AND she strongly believes Ivins did it.

      Bruce Ivins did have loads of potential motives but as is the case with anyone as complex and mentally disturbed as he was, they are not clear. He appears to have craved recognition and sent emails to his friends with pictures of himself with anthrax spores. There are many other cited instances of his seeking out attention during the investigation. He even fingered his co-workers for the crimes and mislead investigators more than once.

      But his larger motive might have been that in 2001 they were threatening to cut funding for his life’s work. Since the attacks, the funding for anthrax research has increased dramatically so at least posthumously, Ivins got what he wanted-recognition and a lot more money for the type of work he was doing. If he had not been targeted by the FBI, he would probably have some serious job security right now.

      His pattern of carrying out secret revenge toward others for perceived slights is strong and consistent. He even had a special post office box he used to facilitate some of this activity. He had a history of taking long drives to do things like vandalize homes or mail anonymous packages. When they searched his house they found letters to seemingly random political and media figures- which is consistent with the targets of the anthrax letters.

      The double life he was leading was marked by his ability to compartmentalize his behaviors fairly well. The fact that those who were closest to him still defend his innocence speaks to how well the two selves were divided in his own mind. I can certainly understand the incredulity of his friends, family and co-workers. It must be hard to accept the cognitive dissonance of the quirky, juggling-teacher, science geek being a killer.

      I can even understand, to an extent, the reasons why the Amerithrax case has conspiracy theorists out in droves. Given the political zeitgeist, the FBI’s apparent incompetence and their reprehensible tactics with suspects, I would be surprised if their weren’t some real questions being asked.

      Something that also makes the case difficult is that Bruce Ivins really was very concerned about his friends and family learning about his odd habits and mental problems. He had a childhood that seems to have cultivated the seeds of his strangeness and he was, as this counselor noted, obsessed with secrets, codes and fooling or tricking people. That was the one thing he thought he could control and when it began to unravel, he did as well.

      Then there’s his own little warped verse he wrote which explains a bit about how this duality worked:

      I’m a little dream-self, short and stout.
      I’m the other half of Bruce — when he lets me out.
      When I get all steamed up, I don’t pout.
      I push Bruce aside, then I’m Free to run about!

      And here’s a link to the NY Times article about the professionals’ assessment.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/us/24anthrax.html?ref=bruceeivins

  • http://www.ContraControl.com/ Zenc

    She's being deceptive and you can see it in her face.

    The way she closes her eyes as she asserts that she knows he's the perp, is the tell. 5:22 of the video.

    His reputed love of vodka, pills, and kinky sex doesn't really seem germane. If it were, then half of Congress would have been suspects

    • 5by5

      Deceptive – yes. You can also see it when she hunts and pecks for accusations by looking up to one side like that. Totally lying.

  • 5by5

    Deceptive – yes. You can also see it when she hunts and pecks for accusations by looking up to one side like that. Totally lying.

  • Anonymous

    You ask who she is. I think that’s pretty clear. She was his addictions counselor at a treatment facility. What does she have to be deceptive about? “A serious bullshit vibe.” you say. What exactly would you say is her motivation for making up anything? Her story has not changed since the beginning.

    She called the FBI because she was concerned about what he would do and that seems honest and straightforward to me. He made serious threats and if she had not reported them then she would not have been doing her job. Her concerns proved to be legitimate. If you mean she is not a terribly credentialed professional you are correct. But then there is a group of very credentialed profilers who have also concluded that he was the one who did it and I have a feeling you would discredit them as well, based on some conspiracy theories which appear to be popular online. (Firedog Lake, etc.) I think you are attacking her because she doesn’t fit in with your theories. She is critical of the FBI AND she strongly believes Ivins did it.

    Bruce Ivins did have loads of potential motives but as is the case with anyone as complex and mentally disturbed as he was, they are not clear. He appears to have craved recognition and sent emails to his friends with pictures of himself with anthrax spores. There are many other cited instances of his seeking out attention during the investigation. He even fingered his co-workers for the crimes and mislead investigators more than once.

    But his larger motive might have been that in 2001 they were threatening to cut funding for his life’s work. Since the attacks, the funding for anthrax research has increased dramatically so at least posthumously, Ivins got what he wanted-recognition and a lot more money for the type of work he was doing. If he had not been targeted by the FBI, he would probably have some serious job security right now.

    His pattern of carrying out secret revenge toward others for perceived slights is strong and consistent. He even had a special post office box he used to facilitate some of this activity. He had a history of taking long drives to do things like vandalize homes or mail anonymous packages. When they searched his house they found letters to seemingly random political and media figures- which is consistent with the targets of the anthrax letters.

    The double life he was leading was marked by his ability to compartmentalize his behaviors fairly well. The fact that those who were closest to him still defend his innocence speaks to how well the two selves were divided in his own mind. I can certainly understand the incredulity of his friends, family and co-workers. It must be hard to accept the cognitive dissonance of the quirky, juggling-teacher, science geek being a killer.

    I can even understand, to an extent, the reasons why the Amerithrax case has conspiracy theorists out in droves. Given the political zeitgeist, the FBI’s apparent incompetence and their reprehensible tactics with suspects, I would be surprised if their weren’t some real questions being asked.

    Something that also makes the case difficult is that Bruce Ivins really was very concerned about his friends and family learning about his odd habits and mental problems. He had a childhood that seems to have cultivated the seeds of his strangeness and he was, as this counselor noted, obsessed with secrets, codes and fooling or tricking people. That was the one thing he thought he could control and when it began to unravel, he did as well.

    Then there’s his own little warped verse he wrote which explains a bit about how this duality worked:

    I’m a little dream-self, short and stout.
    I’m the other half of Bruce — when he lets me out.
    When I get all steamed up, I don’t pout.
    I push Bruce aside, then I’m Free to run about!

    And here’s a link to the NY Times article about the professionals’ assessment.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/us/24anthrax.html?ref=bruceeivins

21
More in Anthrax, Bruce Ivins, FBI, Media, Terrorism
Why Are The Australian Media And Politicians Totally Silent On The Latest Crime Figures?

[disinformation editor's note: the author's native language is not English and he makes numerous spelling and grammar errors. We chose to publish the article notwithstanding this and hope that readers...

Close