Scott Shane, "Expert Panel Is Critical of F.B.I. Work In Investigating Anthrax Letters". February 15
Jerry Markon, "Anthrax report casts doubt on scientific evidence in FBI case against Bruce Ivins." February 15
AND, yes, the first one was actually conducted in December, 1941.
It's now nine and-a-half years later. It's beyond time that subpoena power was applied towards getting the facts on an attack on the US government before the American people.
Yesterday was the capper: the FBI, which had resisted all efforts for independent oversight, and, instead, funded its own evaluation restricted to the scientific evidence--presumably the strongest part of its case--has its own panel cast doubt on that.
And there's plenty of reason to wonder about the rest. There's $5.8 million reasons we paid Steven Hatfill after the Bureau tried him in the papers. What reason do the rest of us have to believe the case against Bruce Ivins was any stronger? Not the lab work, apparently.
Look: this was a direct attack on the U.S. Government. 9/11 was not, despite the apparent belief in some circles that the Pentagon is one of the Two or Three Other Branches, Depending on Who's Counting. We've decided that 9/11 was an Act of War, conveniently, since that was what we were prepared to respond to (though, in the event, not as well as we imagined). The anthrax bombings were an act of pure terrorism, though the FBI has somehow managed to conclude they were more like Ivins' ill-conceived ad campaign for More Lab Work. (And these are the guys who invented, or "invented", Criminal Profiling, but the fact that the bomber targeted Tom Daschle, Patrick Leahy, and the news operations of the three major networks, under the cover of a sort of cartoon Islam, is evidently chalked up to coincidence.)
It's time to live up to our War on Terra rhetoric in a way that will, for once, make a difference. It's time to get to the bottom of this. The investigation hasn't answered any questions, and there are serious questions about the investigation.