This week Bruce Ivins allegedly committed suicide. If you don't know who he is, you'd be far from alone. Remember the letters containing anthrax that were sent to the US Congress and several prominent journalists in 2001 shortly after 9/11?
After a 7 year investigation the US Justice Department was about to pin the crime on Bruce Ivins. Ivins was a US government scientist who worked in the lab where they stored anthrax. Shortly after Ivins' lawyer was informed of the impending charges, Bruce Ivins was found dead, having consumed a massive dose of Tylenol mixed with codeine.
Running alongside that sad event is the story about the renewed fallout from the 2001 ABC News reports that "four separate sources" had told ABC the anthrax attacks were connected with Iraq. If Bruce Ivins really is the guilty party, then those four sources were clearly lying.
For ABC - and any journalist - the question is: Do you protect sources who lied to you?
One would think if a source lied, you owe them nothing. If anything, the risk of being exposed would be a useful way to keep sources honest. In this case, the people who may have mislead ABC News were using the anthrax attacks to back an agenda for war in Iraq. We should know who these people were. If what they said was true, they may have information about the anthrax attacks that might clear the late Mr. Ivins. if they have no such evidence, then they will stand revealed as liars and should be held to account.
As for Mr. Ivins' guilt or innocence, the FBI seems to feel they had an unbeatable case against him, leaving ABC News' sources in a vulnerable position.
Hopefully....the truth will out. Soon. It's been 7 years already.
Who was behind the leak? I have to suspect it was something in, oh, say, the Federal government?
ReplyDeleteImagine if it was Scooter libby? :)