If this is true, that the FBI offered the son of Bruce Ivins $2.5 million to rat him out, then I have to wonder about their claims that Ivins was the guy behind the anthrax attacks.
I don't know much about this stuff, truth be told. But it seems to me that if they felt that they had to offer his son that kind of money and if they felt they had to visit his daughter in her hospital bed to pressure her, then I think the inference can be drawn that they had little to no real evidence against him.
UPDATE: anoymoustache, in the comments, suggested reading this blog post, and I agree with him about that. Go read it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
EBM,
Thats not the only shady part---read this post...
http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2008/08/how_the_bush_administration_ma.php
OK, Let's try that again....I'll split the link....copy and paste is as one into the browser...
http://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2008/08/
how_the_bush_administration_ma.php
Okay.
I hate to start out saying this as a new commenter, but I love you.
No, really, I do.
Sadly, what Mike said makes horribly perfect sense to me.
Gods, what a world, that makes Nixon's little Watergate tricks look childishly innocent.
Three words: Sturmbannführer Alfred Naujocks.
Post a Comment