My not very original theory that applies only if this guy is actually responsible, is that he spent the 90s caught up in the millenial anxieties and conspiracy theories that were so fashionable at the time and then he snapped after 9/11.

Definitely seems like the government covered this up because a white Christian or Jewish American was not the criminal they wanted right after 9/11.

I think the 'lone psychopath' theory is far too simplistic for many reasons. Why would a lone nut target two relatively obscure Democratic politicians--who just happened to be holding up the passage of the PATRIOT Act? Sorry, but Daschle and Leahy are not likely targets for a nut from Maryland, unless he happened to be a super policy wonk.

The last letter to the editor does seem to be damning, however, its tone does not match the other letters to the editor that Ivins read--given the date, could this not have been easily planted as evidence? Also, Ivins was Catholic, which would seem to point away from an obsession with the End Times and Jews.

The anthrax notes themselves are interesting--there was no great national fear of Muslim terrorists pre-9/11, so it seems awfully convenient that the anthrax note to Brokaw dated 9/11 contains the memes that have defined terrorism post-9/11, and the 'GWOT'. Also, is it plausible that a biochemist would misspell 'pennicillin'? Why would he even mention it?

The media involvement was sparked by the power of suggestion, imo, and, encouraged by their handlers and inside sources (who themselves may have been indirectly encouraged/directed by the same methods). Whomever planned the attacks surely knew that certain 'fellow travelers' and/or 'useful idiots' like Laura Mylroie and Brian Ross would take the bait and run with it.

And, by all means, let's have Richard Cohen explain under oath the who, what, where and when of his Cipro source!

The fact that this is now being swept under the rug is just further illustration of the illegitimacy and deception that Bushco's warmaking enterprise was founded upon. Either there is complicity at some level with the anthrax attacks, or there is after-the-fact complicity where the govt. doesn't want us to realize that its 'War on Terror' is a fabrication. My bet is on both, though I also acknowledge the possibility that there have been events that even Bush and Cheney were not aware of.

Not sure this insanity is worth analyzing. I will say it would be convenient for the inept government to say the anthrax assassin committed suicide.

What still surprises me is the utter collapse of the "fourth estate". To listen to the news last night, you'd think that there was nothing left to be investigated, reported, or known about any of this.

Richard Cohen brags about being privy, thanks to government officials, to foreknowledge of the attacks. If Richard Cohen is to be believed, then there is much more to this story than what any lone lunatic theory would allow.

Claims Cohen:

The attacks were not entirely unexpected. I had been told soon after Sept. 11 to secure Cipro, the antidote to anthrax. The tip had come in a roundabout way from a high government official, and I immediately acted on it. I was carrying Cipro way before most people had ever heard of it.

There is one solid piece of news in this latest story and that is the spores did unequivicably came out of the Fort Dietrick lab. This had been suggested before during the Hatfill investigation, but the case appears more solid today.

That is what makes Greenwald's article so powerful. Ivins may or may not be the culprit and I would be willing to give him the benefit of doubt until proven guilty. But as everyone is asking -- who are those anonymous sources?

Duh, you die of diagnosed liver failure and have sufficient Tylenol residue in your blood stream to destroy your liver along with the markers of liver failure, by all means cut out the liver and see if it is destroyed. If it makes you happy.

I read Ivins' letters to the editor, and I didn't hear nutty Christian Cheerleader for the Apocalypse in his writing. From AP:

"Ivins had several letters to the editor published in The Frederick News-Post over the last decade. He denounced taxpayer funding for assisted suicide, pointed readers to a study that suggested a genetic component for homosexuality and said he had stopped listening to local radio station WFMD because he was offended by the language and racially charged commentary of its hosts."

He also provides a favorable mention of the Quakers, who defied the institution of slavery based on their religious beliefs. Maybe eccentric & cranky, but not unthinking.

Reports of Ivin's "bizarre" behavior seem to come from court documents filed by a social worker who worked in group and individual counseling with him. (Jean Duley) She states that his psychiatrist considered him a homicidal sociopath. But it kind of makes you wonder why he wasn't locked up earlier if that was the case.

So you have an eccentric, smart, family guy-type researcher who volunteers at church and gives juggling demonstrations (both in the years prior to and after the Anthrax incidents). The guy goes kinda nutty after being staked out by the FBI for at least a year in connection with a high-pressure investigation that could result in his being charged with five murders.

Not a clear indicator of guilt. It is very puzzling.

I would probably be more accepting of the crazy-guy story except for a strange incident some years ago in which an acquaintance of mine was fired and hospitalized because he had been imagining that someone was using his accounts at work and had become quite agitated about it. Professionals speculated about schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, etc. Suddenly, many of his friends began to point to this or that detail about him "supporting" the diagnosis--a sibling with depression, arguments in which he refused to admit he was wrong, an obsessive interest in baseball.... Years later, after the guy had lost his job, moved, taken anti-psychiatric drugs for some time and spent much time in counseling, an internal investigation at the company revealed that someone who was not authorized to do so had been accessing the accounts.

Why never a published word about the FBI asking about who told people Like Cohen of the anthrax possibility and interviewing them? Who were they? Did the FBI ask, did they interview the official 'warners"?

And why warn journalist before hand and not politicans in congress like Daschle and Leahy? Or were they also warned and carrying cipro?

I don't get it, there are still more questions than answers.

“Curiouser and curiouser!”

The spores came out of the Ft Detrick lab.

The info linking traces of Bentonitem only found in Iraq -also arose via Ft Detrick via [per ABC] "four [highly placed admin sources]"

The above two gleanings from Glenn Greenwald, along with info I'd not connecgted earlier [thank you D Bowman] that the Dems receiving anthrax "just happened to be holding up the passage of the PATRIOT Act" - along with ABC's unwillingness to out sources who clearly were pushing false propaganda under the cloak of anonymity - suggests that - at a minimum, the coverup of this matter - reeks of admin involvement, IMHO

By the way, Greenwald continues to update the story, so it is worth continuing to check Salon each day for these.