Democrat, State Dept end impasse on Cuba money

Rocket News

Kerry and Leahy pushing their brand of
Democracy in Cuba

WASHINGTON – A senior Democratic senator and the State Department have resolved their dispute over U.S. aid to a program that promotes democracy in communist Cuba, clearing the way for the Obama administration to spend $20 million in assistance.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who had placed a hold on the money, said Tuesday that the department provided answers about oversight of the program and he had stopped blocking the funds. Established in 1996, the program promotes human rights and basic freedoms in the Castro-led nation, but it has come under question amid reports of grantees misusing money and little U.S. scrutiny.

"The United States has a strong interest in helping the Cuban people improve their lives and protect their rights. We also have a responsibility to know how U.S. taxpayer dollars are used and whether programs are effective," Leahy said in a statement. "For too long this program has been carried out in ways that have been neither transparent nor accountable, and with no way to measure results. That needs to change, and getting answers about the way these funds are spent is a constructive first step."

Leahy, who is chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on State Department and Foreign Operations, has not been the only lawmaker to challenge the program. Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., had blocked the distribution of the $20 million on April 1, arguing that the funds weren't helping the Cuban people and instead were provoking the Raul Castro regime.

Transparency had been an issue in the standoff because the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development had not provided information on the program's contracts requested by the Foreign Relations Committee, which has oversight authority over the agencies.

But last week, Kerry said he was lifting the hold after receiving assurances from the State Department about the program's effectiveness.

The program and the dispute had divided congressional Democrats as well as Cuban-Americans, and pitted Rep. Albio Sires, D-N.J., and Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., against Kerry and Leahy.

The issue also stirred the political implications for President Barack Obama and Democrats facing re-election next year while reviving the debate over human rights in Cuba after more than a half-century of control by Fidel and Raul Castro.

Sires and Menendez face re-election next year in New Jersey, home to more than 80,000 Cuban-Americans.

Many of the democracy programs are based in Florida, which Obama won by a margin of 2.8 percentage points in 2008 over Republican John McCain. In prevailing in the state, the Democrat captured a solid 47 percent of the Cuban-American vote, and any erosion of support could impact the outcome in 2012.

Science review casts doubt on 2001 anthrax case

Google

WASHINGTON — A scientific review released Tuesday cast doubt on the US government's conclusion that scientist Bruce Ivins, who killed himself in 2008, was to blame in the 2001 case of deadly anthrax mailings.

There was insufficient scientific evidence to support the FBI's assertion that anthrax sent to politicians and journalists in the wake of the September 11 attacks originated in Ivins' lab, said the National Academy of Sciences.

"It is not possible to reach a definitive conclusion about the origins of the B. anthracis in the mailings based on the available scientific evidence alone," said the NAS report.

The anthrax mailings, which killed five people and injured 17, rattled an already jittery American public just days after Al-Qaeda militants hijacked passenger jets and plunged them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

The review found that anthrax contained in a flask, known as RMR-1029, in Ivins' lab shared genetic similarities with spores in the mailed letters but "was not the immediate source of spores used in the letters."

"One or more derivative growth steps would have been required to produce the anthrax in the attack letters," the report said, adding that the letters sent to Washington had different characteristics than those sent to New York.

"They have enough physical and chemical differences between the two that they must have come from separate batches," said lead author of the report Alice Gast.

The FBI concluded that the mailed anthrax must have come from a single flask of parent spores that Ivins had created and which he alone had maintained.

The type of anthrax contained in the letters, mailed to NBC anchor Tom Brokaw, the New York Post and senators Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy, was correctly identified as the Ames strain of B. anthracis, which originated from a cow in Texas in 1981 and was shared with labs worldwide, the report said.

But a key problem arose from the way the FBI attempted to narrow down the source of the anthrax by creating a repository of potential samples provided by the labs that maintain them.

The repository was incomplete, leaving the possibility that other sources could remain unexamined, and also relied on scientists to provide their own samples, allowing for manipulation by potential suspects.

"Standards of custody of evidence would dictate that agents of the FBI should have obtained the samples," the report said.

"The sender could have been the instigator and may not have complied with instructions, as the FBI alleges with respect to Dr. Ivins."

Ivins, a bio-defense researcher at the US Army's Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, committed suicide by taking drugstore medications in July 2008 as FBI agents were about to bring charges against him.

Investigators began focusing on Ivins in 2007 after new forensic scientific methods traced the anthrax back to him.

The NAS report was delayed in November 2010 when the FBI, which had just received the final draft for security review, decided to release more, previously classified information for the panel to consider.
FBI investigators had looked at anthrax evidence from "an undisclosed overseas site at which a terrorist group's anthrax program was allegedly located," the report said.

"The information indicates that there was inconsistent evidence of Ames strain DNA in some of these samples, but no culturable B. anthracis," it said, adding that the late-arriving information "deserves a more thorough scientific review."

The NAS reviewers also noted that their analysis of evidence was limited to "the biological, physical, and chemical sciences," and did not consider other traditional forensic science methods.

The FBI, which commissioned the NAS report, highlighted the panel's assertion that a definitive conclusion based on science alone "was not possible" and said a combination of factors led investigators to Ivins.

"The FBI has long maintained that while science played a significant role, it was the totality of the investigative process that determined the outcome of the anthrax case," it said in a statement.
Some lawmakers called for a new, independent probe of the government's response.

"The National Academy of Sciences report released today shows that the science is not necessarily a slam dunk," said Senator Chuck Grassley.

"There are no more excuses for avoiding an independent review and assessment of how the FBI handled its investigation in the anthrax case."

Congressman Rush Holt said he was re-introducing a 2008 bill to establish a legislative commission to investigate.

Doubts cloud closing of anthrax case

Asia Times Online

An investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, described by the Department of Justice as the largest investigation into a bioweapons attack in the country's history, has come to a close...
...More than eight years later, there are many critics who do not agree with the FBI's conclusions.

One is Norman Covert, public affairs officer and historian at Fort Detrick from 1977 to 1999, who wrote a column, "White Powder and 007" in 2008. Asked by Asia Times Online if this 2008 column needed updating in light of the FBI's release, Covert said: "With the FBI's latest decision, my words are still apropos."

Here is an excerpt [6]:

The government mobilized its team of Double-oh (uh-oh!) secret agents seven years ago to identify a villainous mad scientist, who, without genuine motive or opportunity, single handedly:

Used a Bio-Containment Level Three lab suite at Fort Detrick's US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), to develop a highly bred, weapons-grade strain of Bacillus anthracis (a scientific achievement not accomplished before, except perhaps in the biological warfare laboratories of the former Soviet Union);

Manipulated this super bacillus with a silica coating and a slight electrical charge so that, when opened in the containment cabinet, each particle repelled others in a brilliant display;

Ensured each particle was no more than five microns in size so that it would penetrate the fabric of a normal No 10 paper envelope, a product sold by the US Postal Service in the District of Columbia, Northern Virginia, West Virginia and Central Maryland;
Managed to remove the material from the laboratory with it already placed in at least one envelope, also likely encased in an impermeable container, which would be obscured from the security guard;

Managed to avoid leaving any evidence on his clothing, his two automobiles and van, his house, garage, office and other personal items despite the extremely "dirty" potential of the dry agent;

Managed, in a fashion unknown to the Department of Homeland Security and the "Double-Ohs", to have the envelopes placed in a mailbox in Princeton, NJ, with a note in a handwriting that cannot be identified with any known person;

Managed to obscure this cutting-edge science from a host of colleagues for the entire development period - a major feat in itself!

Simultaneously he managed to significantly improve an old anthrax vaccine to protect our troops during Operation Desert Storm; then was a key developer of the new recombinant DNA-based anthrax vaccine that was undergoing efficacy trials at USAMRIID.

By September of 2006, the FBI had 17 special agents assigned to a multi-agency task force that included 10 US Postal Service inspectors. The investigation covered six continents, logged interviews with more than 9,000 witnesses, conducted about 70 searches, and issued 6,000 grand jury subpoenas.

Full Article