To Stop the Unraveling, Executive Privilege Declared

The obstruction of transparency begins in earnest once again. The State Department released the first court ordered drop of Hillary Clinton’s email from her private server and accounts. It is fascinating reading but a lot of it. At the very beginning of Hillary’s term as Secretary of State, she used Sidney Blumenthal as her ghost front person, the emails define this in undisputed terms.

Speaker Boehner and the Gowdy commission are beyond angry as noted here:

“The Hillary Clinton private emails controversy has new legs and the Democratic frontrunner has only herself to blame,” CNN’s John King reported Sunday. “After the House Select Benghazi Committee released new emails this past week, the Obama State Department was forced to admit it was not in possession of some Clinton emails that clearly discussed department business. … Secretary Clinton can’t definitely prove there aren’t additional things that should have been turned over to the government that were not. She can’t prove that because she erased her private email server without any independent supervision.” Pointing out that Hillary Clinton’s statement that she had turned over all of her work-related emails “is not true,” MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell piled on. “If you care at all about the Freedom of Information Act, which is what liberals should care about here, that was an absolutely unacceptable choice from the start, that she used an email system in that way, and then that she deleted it,” he said Tuesday. “That was to contradict the Freedom of Information Act, Americans’ freedom, the press freedom, to be able to request these kinds of documents.” But it was exactly this accountability and transparency that Hillary Clinton tried so hard to avoid as she performed her taxpayer-funded duties as Secretary of State. That includes periods of time when the Benghazi terrorist attack was front and center, and Sidney Blumenthal was sending her unvetted, unsubstantiated intelligence on Libya. The Obama administration confirmed last week that she deleted specific parts of at least six emails before turning them over to the State Department. What other emails are still missing? More details here.

Here comes the privilege:

In part from the Washington Examiner,

The State Department has informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi that it is withholding “a small number” of documents from investigators on the basis of “important executive branch institutional interests.” The statement, made in a letter from Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield to committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, amounts to a de facto claim of executive privilege.

‘Frifield made the claim in a letter turning over 3,600 pages of Benghazi-related documents from three current and former administration officials: Susan Rice, Jake Sullivan, and Cheryl Mills. Rice, a former United Nations ambassador, is now national security adviser, while Sullivan and Mills are close aides to Hillary Clinton who worked at the department when she was secretary of state’. Many more details here. 

The top emails of interest are noted below.

From Politico:

On Tuesday evening the State Department released approximately 3,000 pages of emails sent by and to Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, primarily in 2009.

Most of the messages are mundane, featuring anodyne remarks about scheduling or clipped news releases. But a choice few reveal idiosyncrasies and quirks from America’s highest-ranking diplomats, Washington strategists, and politicos — including the presumptive Democratic 2016 presidential front-runner herself.

Here are some highlights:

Colin Powell Jokes About Richard Holbrooke

After Clinton tripped and fractured her elbow in June 2009, one of her predecessors at the State Department sent her an email wishing her well. “Hillary, Is it true that Holbrooke tripped you?” Colin Powell wrote to Clinton, referring to Richard Holbrooke who at the time was serving as President Barack Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan. “Just kidding. Get better fast, we need you running around.”

John Podesta Rips Off Colin Powell’s Joke

Unwilling to leave the retired four-star general with the last laugh, John Podesta made the same joke in an email only two days later. After wishing the Secretary of State well following her elbow injury, Podesta wrote “PS No matter what anybody says, we refuse to believe that Holbrooke tripped you.”

Grandmother Knows Best

After failing to schedule a late-night phone call with Podesta and rescheduling for the following morning, Hillary Clinton offered the longtime ally a piece of advice before going to bed: “Please wear socks to bed to keep your feet warm.”

Hillary Clinton vs. the Fax Machine

The Secretary of State had an epic battle with the office technology in December 2009. Clinton struggled in an email exchange with aide Huma Abedin to figure out how to establish the fax line. “I thought it was supposed to be off hook to work?” Clinton puzzled.

Keeping the Axe at Bay

After receiving an email from her aide Cheryl Mills with the subject line “axelrod wants your email – remind me to discuss with you if i forget,” Clinton did not respond enthusiastically to the prospect of one of Obama’s top advisers receiving her contact info. “Can you send to him or do you want me to?” Clinton wrote. “Does he know I can’t look at it all day so he needs to contact me thru you or Huma or Lauren during work hours.”

Who Would Criticize Gen. James Jones?

The New York Times’ Mark Landler published an article in May 2009, only a few months into Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, referring to tension between President Obama’s National Security Adviser, retired Gen. James Jones, and the secretary of state. Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines wrote an email to Cheryl Mills, which was forwarded to Clinton, saying that no one in the secretary’s circle could have possibly been Landler’s source. “Someone in her circle is someone like you, or a Jake, or me. And none of us would ever say anything like that,” Reines wrote. “Mark conceded that point and let me know he will be changing the sourcing…It’s a small consolation, but I think a very important one.”

George Packer’s Profile of Richard Holbrooke

In September 2009, as George Packer was deep into his profile of Richard Holbrooke for The New Yorker, Clinton aides emailed back and forth assuring that they were providing the journalist with all of the key facts — and no information that could be damaging to the Secretary of State. “Obviously Richard strayed shall we say from discussion of our strategy,” then-Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowley wrote. “It ends up being a semi-profile on Richard. I’ll alert the WH. I don’t see anything here that is problematic for the Secretary, but I don’t know that every detail here is correct.”

Clinton responded cryptically, “I know more about this if you wish to discuss.”

Hillary Needs to be Alerted About Bill’s Plans

In 2009 former President Bill Clinton was selected by the United Nations to serve as a special envoy to Haiti. According to emails, Hillary Clinton didn’t find out until it leaked out of the UN. “Wjc said he was going to call hrc but hasn’t had time,” wrote Doug Band, a longtime Clinton aide. “You need to walk this to HRC if she is not gone,” responded Cheryl Mills.

Sid Blumenthal Points Out Denis McDonough’s ‘Trashing Biden

In an email to Clinton, Sid Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton ally, attaches a piece by Jim Hoagland in the Washington Post that he says “nails McDonough for trashing Biden.” At the time Denis McDonough was working on strategic communications for the National Security Council, but he has since been promoted to Obama’s Chief of Staff. Hoagland wrote, “Denis McDonough, my strategic communications man, sold Biden-as-dove brilliantly. Wasn’t somebody just saying I should promote Denis? Maybe it was Denis?”

Clinton’s Late Night Blumenthal Chat

In October 2009, Hillary Clinton sent an email to Sid Blumenthal at 10:35 p.m. asking in the subject line “Are you still awake?” The body of the email read “I will call if you are.” No response from Blumenthal was included.

Clinton Frets about Canceled Meetings with White House

In a June 2009 email with the subject line “No WH mtg,” Hillary Clinton wrote “I arrived for the 10:15 mtg and was told there was no mtg. Matt said they had ‘released’ the time. This is the second time this has happened. What’s up???”

Financing Clinton’s Debt

In an email to longtime Clinton ally Paul Begala, Capricia Marshall, a former senior adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign wrote that an email contest had raised $500,000, followed by two exclamation points. The money, presumably, went to finance Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign’s debt. “You all are amazing – the world adores you! You put a serious hole in hrc debt! A million thanks!”

If you have the time and inclination, you can read the full first set of released emails here.

 

 

The Most Corrupt U.S. Govt Bank Goes Dark

This is a small win for conservatives, but more it stops epic abuse and pay to play operations. The Exim Bank is for small business to be able to get global access. Would you consider Boeing or General Electric to be small?

 

(CNSNews.com) – Three corporations together received 44 percent of the Export-Import Bank’s $32.7 billion in assistance in 2011 – a total of $13.5 billion in federal financial aid. The three were Boeing, General Electric and international engineering firm Black and Veatch International.

Boeing alone received 38 percent of the bank’s financial assistance, or $12.4 billion ($11.7 billion for the mother company and another $700 million for its Boeing Satellite Systems subsidiary.)

General Electric received $1.2 billion while Black and Veatch received $805 million, according to the bank’s 2011 annual report.

The Export-Import Bank, whose authorization runs out in seven weeks’ time, is opposed by some conservatives who argue that it provides corporate welfare and below-market financing.

***  “The global economy is more integrated than ever … If we’re going to grow, it’s going to be because of exports. We’re on track to double our exports – a goal that I set when I came into office. Part of the reason for that is the terrific work that’s being done by our Export-Import Bank.”
President Barack Obama
November 12, 2011

It should be noted that the White House and the State Department had their hands all over this loan give-away agency. Note this is a State Department website link proving collusion and pay to play.

From the Washington Examiner:

Export-Import Bank enters ‘liquidation’ tomorrow night at midnight

Tuesday night at midnight, the 2014 reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank expires. The agency, under law, doesn’t evaporate immediately. Instead, per the law, Ex-Im enters “liquidation,” which is basically Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

Specifically, Ex-Im’s authorization allows it to continue to exist for one purpose: “exercising any of its functions subsequent to such date for purposes of orderly liquidation….”

Liquidation is Chapter 7 bankruptcy — which is exit, extinction. It is not Chapter 11 bankruptcy, which is what companies enter temporarily in order to reorganize and then come back. Ex-Im workers, when they return Wednesday morning, are supposed to be in the business of dismantling Ex-Im.

As I read it, that means Ex-Im is supposed to sell off the loans and guarantees on which it is currently sitting — not in a fire sale, but in an orderly fashion.

This isn’t a “lapse.” This is liquidation. I know many Ex-Im employees simply see this as a temporary lapse in lending authority, but that view is contrary to the law.

It will be interesting to see how Ex-Im officials follow the law.

Here is the full text of the relevant section of the law:

Export-Import Bank of the United States shall continue to exercise its functions in connection with and in furtherance of its objects and purposes until the close of business on September 30, 2014, but the provisions of this section shall not be construed as preventing the bank from acquiring obligations prior to such date which mature subsequent to such date or from assuming prior to such date liability as guarantor, endorser, or acceptor of obligations which mature subsequent to such date or from issuing, either prior or subsequent to such date, for purchase by the Secretary of the Treasury or any other purchasers, its notes, debentures, bonds, or other obligations which mature subsequent to such date or from continuing as a corporate agency of the United States and exercising any of its functions subsequent to such date for purposes of orderly liquidation, including the administration of its assets and the collection of any obligations held by the bank.

 

 

The U.S. $73 Billion Puerto Rico Problem

In a White House briefing, Josh Earnest, the spokesperson revealed that the United States will not bail our Puerto Rico. Oh really? In March of 2009, the White House created one of ‘those’ task forces, this one dedicated to Puerto Rico. 4 years later….financial crisis is worse.

On October 30, 2009, President Obama signed Executive Order 13517, which directed the Task Force to maintain its focus on the status question, but added to the Task Force’s responsibilities by seeking advice and recommendations on policies that promote job creation, education, health care, clean energy, and economic development on the Island.

The current Task Force was convened in December 2009 with members from every Cabinet agency. It organized two public hearings in San Juan, Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C. to hear directly from a broad cross section of voices on the issues of status and economic development. Furthermore, hundreds of citizens from Puerto Rico and the mainland offered input by sending materials through the mail and electronically through a White House public comment e-mail address. Members of the Task Force and White House staff also met with congressional leaders, Puerto Rican elected officials, and other interested parties to hear their views.

 

   

From the WSJ:

As Puerto Rico sinks under the weight of $73 billion in government and agency debt—not to mention billions more in unfunded pension and health-care liabilities—its political class is looking for an escape hatch.

This isn’t about wiping the slate clean. But if a bankruptcy judge approved the write-down of, say, half the municipal debt, it would reduce the fiscal pressure.

There’s an app for that. The trouble for Puerto Rico is that getting it requires a retroactive change in U.S. law. If Congress cares about the future of Puerto Rico or the hundreds of thousands of Americans who hold Puerto Rican debt, it will just say no.

More than half of the outstanding Puerto Rico debt is triple tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by government-owned corporations. Unlike public corporations and municipalities in the 50 states, these enterprises do not have access to Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection under the U.S. code. If they fail to meet their loan obligations, they face receivership.

Last June Puerto Rico enacted a law to allow its government corporations to declare bankruptcy. But in February, a U.S. federal judge in San Juan struck down that law on grounds that the federal bankruptcy code supersedes it.

Greece vs. Puerto Rico

The governor warned that Puerto Rico can’t pay its $72 billion public debt on the eve of a private Monday meeting with legislators, delivering another jolt to the recession-gripped U.S. island as well as a world financial system already worrying over Greece’s collapsing finances.

Gov. Alejandro Garcia Padilla is hoping to defer debt payments while negotiating with creditors, spokesman Jesus Manuel Ortiz said Sunday night.

Garcia is expected to air a pre-recorded televised address after meeting with legislators, who are still debating a $9.8 billion budget that calls for $674 million in cuts and sets aside $1.5 billion to help pay off the debt. The budget has to be approved by Tuesday.

Ortiz confirmed comments by Padilla that appeared in a report in The New York Times published late Sunday, less than a day before Garcia planned to meet with legislators.

“There is no other option. I would love to have an easier option. This is not politics, this is math,” Garcia is quoted as saying in the Times.

Puerto Rico’s bonds were popular with U.S. mutual funds because they were tax-free, but hedge funds and distressed-debt buyers began stepping in to buy up debt as the island’s economy worsened and its credit rating dropped.

Garcia’s comments will likely not have much impact on Wall Street, said economist Jose Villamil, a former U.N. consultant and CEO of an economic and planning consulting firm.

“The markets are clear that Puerto Rico is heading to a direction of a restructuring or default,” said the economist, adding that a voluntary restructuring by bondholders might be the best option.

“The last four administrations have kicked the can down the road,” said Villamil. “At this point, there is no more can to kick. So we’re going to take some very strict measures and some very profound measures. It’s going to hurt, but there’s no way out.”

Some legislators were taken aback by Garcia’s comments, including Rep. Jenniffer Gonzalez, spokeswoman for the main opposition party.

“I think it’s irresponsible,” Gonzalez said. “He met privately with The New York Times last week, but he hasn’t met with the leaders of this island.”

Puerto Rico’s constitution dictates that the debt has to be paid before any other financial obligation is met. If Garcia seeks to not pay the debt at all, it will require a referendum and a vote on a constitutional amendment, she said in a phone interview.

Puerto Rico’s situation has drawn comparisons to Greece, where the government decreed this weekend that banks would be shuttered for six business days and restrictions imposed on cash withdrawals. The country’s five-year financial crisis has sparked questions about its continued membership in the 19-nation shared euro currency and the European Union.

Puerto Rico’s governor recently confirmed that he had considered having his government seek permission from the U.S. Congress to declare bankruptcy amid a nearly decade-long economic slump. His administration is currently pushing for the right for Puerto Rico’s public agencies to file for bankruptcy under Chapter 9. Neither the agencies nor the island’s government can file for bankruptcy under current U.S. rules.

Puerto Rico’s public agencies owe a large portion of the debt, with the power company alone owing some $9 billion. The company is facing a restructuring as the government continues to negotiate with creditors as the deadline for a roughly $400 million payment nears.

Garcia has taken several measures to help generate more government revenue, including signing legislation raising the sales tax to 11.5 percent and creating a 4 percent tax on professional services. The sales tax increase goes into effect Wednesday and the new services tax on Oct. 1, to be followed by a transition to a value-added tax by April 1.

When Do Murders by Illegals Become a Crisis?

A murder a day? The numbers are tracking to be almost accurate as Barack Obama’s prisoner release policy of illegals is killing Americans.

Senator Grassley needs our help as his office is demanding answers. It is also most important to track this bill making its way through the congressional legislative path. The sponsors of this bill are also questionable including Congressman Duncan Hunter, (R-CA).

There are on average 44 murders a day in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Assuming murders by illegal immigrants were prorated as a percentage of the U.S. population, it is not unreasonable to assume one to two murders a day are committed by illegal immigrants.

121 murders attributed to illegals released by Obama administration

Washington Times:

More than 100 immigrants whom the Obama administration released back into the community went on to be charged with subsequent killings, according to government data released Monday that raises more questions about whether immigration authorities are doing enough to detail illegal immigrants awaiting deportation.

In one case, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that its agents didn’t find out about an illegal immigrant’s death threats and court injunctions against him — which should have put him back in detention — until after the man was accused of murder.

That case, involving Apolinar Altamirano, is the latest instance of someone who went through the Obama administration’s deportation system and was released, only to go on to be charged with major crimes.

 

ICE officials say they don’t regularly notify local authorities when they release an immigrant and don’t have a way of finding out from those authorities whether a former detainee gets into trouble with the law, so they didn’t know whether Mr. Altamirano’s $10,000 bond should have been revoked.

“ICE was not aware of the injunctions against Mr. Altamirano until after his January 22, 2015 arrest for first-degree murder, armed robbery and related offenses,” the agency said in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, and Sen. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican in whose state the killing occurred.

All told, 121 immigrants who were held but eventually released by ICE went on to commit “homicide-related offenses” from 2010 through 2014, the agency said.

It said 33 of those were ordered released by immigration courts and another 24 were released because of a 2001 Supreme Court decision capping the time an immigrant can be detained to six months. But a majority of the releases were at ICE’s discretion.

In a statement Monday, ICE said that a criminal record isn’t enough to qualify for mandatory detention under agency policies.

“When making custody determinations, ICE performs an individualized review of the individual’s immigration history and criminal history, pursuant to the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA),” the agency said. “In accordance with the requirements of the INA, not all criminals are subject to mandatory detention and thus may be eligible for bond.”

Detention cannot be used as a further punishment for their crimes or for being in the country illegally, but rather must be used as a tool for further deportation.

Still, ICE stiffened its policies this year, insisting that a supervisor approve cases when the agency plans to release immigrants with serious criminal records.

Even those released are usually monitored in some fashion, though The Washington Times reported last week that most of those under electronic monitoring violated some conditions of their release. Few violations were deemed serious enough to have their release revoked.

Critics who have been pushing for stiffer immigration enforcement said the violence rate for released immigrants is probably much higher and the 121 charged are only those who have been caught.

“Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime,” said Maria Espinoza, co-founder of the Remembrance Project, which advocates for victims of crimes committed by immigrants. “This further supports what we have been fighting for. The safety and welfare of Americans must be the priority of the administration and the Republican-led Congress.”

Don Rosenberg, whose son was killed in a traffic accident by an illegal immigrant driving without a license, said the government lacks the willpower to deport people and to do it quickly.

“These people can and should be deported. We have that option, and we don’t want to take it, and this is what happens,” he said. “I guess until somebody who has the responsibility to make these decisions has one of their loved ones killed, it’s going to continue to happen.”

In the case of Mr. Altamirano, he was put in deportation proceedings on Jan. 3, 2013, and released after posting bond four days later. His first hearing before the immigration court wasn’t until April 9, 2014, and he was still awaiting a final deportation order in January this year when he was arrested on charges of shooting a convenience store clerk in Mesa, Arizona.

Mr. Grassley and Sen. Jeff Sessions, Alabama Republican and chairman of the immigration subcommittee, are seeking answers from Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Secretary of State John F. Kerry.

The senators want to know why Mr. Kerry hasn’t put more pressure on other countries to take back their citizens whom the U.S. wants to deport. Under the 2001 Supreme Court ruling known as the Zadvydas case, the U.S. generally cannot detain foreigners longer than six months if their countries won’t accept them. Every year, thousands of immigrants are put back on the streets because of Zadvydas.

Republicans have long pressured the State Department — under President George W. Bush and now under President Obama — to use diplomatic tools such as denying visas to top officials try to force other countries to take back their citizens.

The Times reported that ICE releases hundreds of Cuban criminals into U.S. communities every year because the island nation refuses to take them back.

 

 

Bio-weapons, History: Russia, Syria and Beyond

As it has been proven by countless authorities, chemical weapons used in Syria still continues today with future conditions ripe for more death events by chemical weapons.

Bashir al Assad is a desperate man today and nothing is beyond desperate decisions including more chemical weapons or attempting to kill his Vice President.

In part from the WSJ:

Assad Chemical Threat Rises
U.S. intelligence agencies believe there is a strong possibility the Assad regime will use chemical weapons on a large scale as part of a last-ditch effort to protect key Syrian government strongholds if Islamist fighters and other rebels try to overrun them, U.S. officials said.

Analysts and policy makers have been poring over all available intelligence hoping to determine what types of chemical weapons the regime might be able to deploy and what event or events might trigger their use, according to officials briefed on the matter.

Last year, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad let international inspectors oversee the removal of what President Barack Obama called the regime’s most deadly chemical weapons. The deal averted U.S. airstrikes that would have come in retaliation for an Aug. 21, 2013, sarin-gas attack that killed more than 1,400 people.

 

Since then, the U.S. officials said, the Assad regime has developed and deployed a new type of chemical bomb filled with chlorine, which Mr. Assad could now decide to use on a larger scale in key areas. U.S. officials also suspect the regime may have squirreled away at least a small reserve of the chemical precursors needed to make nerve agents sarin or VX. Use of those chemicals would raise greater international concerns because they are more deadly than chlorine and were supposed to have been eliminated. Read more here.

*** Obama defers the chemical weapons operation in Syria to Russia. Obama announced his red-line of use of chemical weapons in Syria as a shallow and empty threat. This decision is best described as giving a known terrorist ICBM’s. How so?

In part from Congressional documents: When Yeltsin took office in January 1992, the US forced his public admission that there had been an offensive Soviet BW program and that it had continued until March 1992. Yeltsin promised the US president and the British prime minister to abolish the program, which he apparently presumed to think would be possible by decree, and to dismiss the military officials who had run the program for the preceding decades. However, he did not do any of these things. These same military officials who advised Yeltsin in January 1992 to continue the BW program remained in their positions. Following additional defections from the program, the US and UK stated that the BW program continued as of September 1992, and they forced Russian agreement to the Trilateral Statement, signed in Moscow in September 1992. Russia committed itself in the document to allow access to the biological weapon facilities of the Russian Ministry of Defense. However Russian negotiating teams ran these negotiations into the ground between 1993 and 1996, at which point they were discontinued. An unconcerned and essentially oblivious Yeltsin had long before this point simply washed his hands of the issue despite repeated appeals by President Clinton and his senior officials.

US and EU assistance programs for the conversion of the Biopreparat and Ministry of Agriculture facilities led to access to these and assurance that they were subsequently performing legitimate civilian research and commercial activities. Virtually no proliferation apparently took place from the Soviet BW program. Official annual US government declarations continue to question Russian compliance with the BWC, and the three major Ministry of Defense facilities remain closed to this day.

In a somewhat bizarre development in February and March 2012 Putin and then-Russian Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov publicly referred to 28 tasks that Putin established for the RF-MOD in order “to prepare for threats of the future.” Putin wrote that Russia needed to be prepared for “quick and effective responses to new challenges,” and one of the 28 tasks that Putin specified as “The development of weapons based on new physical principles: radiation, geophysical, wave, genetic, psychophysical, etc.”2 “Genetic” weapons would obviously be forbidden by the Biological Weapons Convention, and the remainder are an arms control nightmare that would explicitly contravene another multilateral arms control treaty that was championed by the Brezhnev administration, the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or any other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Technologies, signed on May 18, 1977 and entered into force on October 5, 1978.

The three primary issues of current concern regarding Russia and biological weapons are therefore the following:

1) Russia destroyed the Trilateral negotiations that followed from the September 1992 US-UKRussian Trilateral Agreement.

2) As a corollary, the three Russian Ministry of Defense BW laboratories remain closed to international examination. There is no way of knowing whether these institutions continue an offensive BW program, and if so, to what degree.

3) The statement by President Vladimir Putin in February-March 2012 to develop genetic weapons is extremely problematic and troubling. Putin’s remarks were never revoked or clarified to this date.

 Where is Obama and Samantha Power at the UN on this matter?

What real explanation can Barack Obama offer that he turned to Putin to deal with the matter in Syria? How much more genocide will there be and will it be confined just to Syria?

In part: “Ken Alibek was Dr. Kanatjan Alibekov, the first deputy chief of research and production for the Soviet biological-weapons program. He was the top scientist in the program, a sprawling, clandestine enterprise known as Biopreparat, or The System, by the scientists who worked in it. Biopreparat research-and-production facilities were flung all across the Soviet Union. As Dr. Alibekov, Ken Alibek had thirtytwo thousand scientists and staff people working under him. Alibek has a Doctor of Sciences degree in anthrax. It is a kind of superdegree, which he received in 1988, at the age of thirty-seven, for directing the research team that developed the Soviet Union’s most powerful weapons-grade anthrax. He did this research as head of the Stepnagorsk bioweapons facility, in what is now Kazakhstan, which was once the largest biowarfare production facility in the world. The Afibekov anthrax became fitfly operational in 1989. It is an amber-gray powder, finer than bath talc, with smooth, creamy particles that tend to fly apart and vanish in the air, becoming invisible and driffing for miles. The Alibekov anthrax is four times more efficient than the standard product. Ken Alibek is part of a diaspora of biologists who came out of Russia foflowing the breakup of the Soviet Union. Government funding for research decreased dramatically, and scientists who were working in the biowarfare program found themselves without jobs. Some of them went looking abroad. A few have come to the United States or Great Britain, but most went elsewhere. “No one knows where they are,” Alibek says. One can guess-that they’ve ended up in Iraq, Syria, Libya, China, Iran, perhaps Israel, perhaps India–but no one really knows, probably not even the Russian’ government. No doubt some of these biologists have carried the Alibekov formi4a in their heads, if not master seed strains of the anthrax and samples of the finished product in containers. The Alibekov anthrax may be one of the more common bioweapons in the world today. It seems plausible that Iraqi biologists, for instance, know the Alibekov formula by now. One day, Ken Alibek and I were sitting in a conference room near his office taMng about the anthrax he and his research team had developed. “It’s very difficult to say if I felt a sense of excitement over this. It’s very difficult to say what I felt like,” he said. “It woulddt be true to say that I thought I was doing something wrong..l thought I had done something very important. The anthrax was one of my [outstanding] scientific personal result.” I asked him if he’d tell me the formula for his anthrax. “I cadt say this,” he answered. “I won’t publish it. I’m just curious,” I said. “Look, you must understand, this is unbelievably serious. You can’t publish this formula,” he said. When I assured him I wouldn’t, he told me the formula for the Alibekov anthrax. He uttered just one sentence. The Alibekov anthrax is simple, and the formula is somewhat surprisingi not quite what you’d expect. Two unrelated materials are mixed with pure powdered anthrax spores. It took a lot of research and testing to get the trick right, and Afibek must have driven his research group hard and skdmy to arrive at it. “There are many countries that would to know how to do this,” he said.”