The Perseus Books Group Message Boards Forum Index The Perseus Books Group Message Boards
Book discussion forums
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Who is BioPort and Admiral Crowe connection????????

Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Perseus Books Group Message Boards Forum Index -> Vaccine-A
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Timothy W. Maier

PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:57 pm    Post subject: Who is BioPort and Admiral Crowe connection???????? Reply with quote

Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 2:48 pm Post subject: Why BioPort Got a Shot in the Arm


Why BioPort Got a Shot in the Arm - allegations of misconduct surround maker of anthrax vaccineInsight on the News, Sept 20, 1999 by Timothy W. Maier
Save a personal copy of this article and quickly find it again with Get started now. (It's free.)Allegations of ethical misconduct surround the start-up company that has become a multimillion-dollar supplier of anthrax vaccine to the Pentagon.

Coming seemingly from nowhere, the Lansing, Mich.-based biotech company in its first year of existence landed a multimillion-dollar contract for perhaps the greatest weapon ever employed by the military: an anthrax vaccine. But it hasn't come easily. Rocked by allegations of ethical misconduct, financial chaos and dangerously sloppy management practices involving two former Michigan lab directors who were hired by BioPort Corp., the company now finds itself the target of a federal probe.

Republican Rep. Walter Jones Jr. of North Carolina, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, requested the Defense Department's, or DOD's, inspector general to investigate the Pentagon's financial relationship with BioPort. "I believe we have a skunk," Jones tells Insight. "I just can't find out where the odor is."

The federal probe comes on the heels of the Pentagon announcing it doubled the sole-source contract to purchase the vaccine, from $25.7 million to $49.8 million, in an effort to help stabilize the financially troubled company. Under the new contract, BioPort will provide about 2.3 million fewer doses than previously requested, for a total of about 5.3 million doses. The Pentagon says the expected deliveries still will be enough to administer the vaccine to all those who need it.

But the terms of the deal are raising questions: The Pentagon also agreed to advance BioPort $18.7 million to cover its debts. BioPort claimed unless the Pentagon paid the up-front money, military authorities would not have enough vaccine to inoculate all 2.4 million U.S. troops.

Jones calls the $18.7 million advance disturbing. "Why is the taxpayer doing it, if it is not mandated?" he asks.

In a letter Jones sent to DOD Inspector General Donald Mancuso, he says, "While I understand the need to revisit contracts between the government and its suppliers, I am increasingly concerned about the nature of the relationship between DOD and BioPort Corporation.... [D]espite serious questions regarding the overall viability of BioPort, the federal government has chosen to more than double the value of its existing contract.

"If a company is to be the sole producer of a vaccine for every member of our armed forces, it is imperative that every aspect of the relationship with that company be sound," Jones continued. "Failure to follow that principle jeopardizes the health and safety of the men and women in our military, as well as that of their families."

Jones cited recent congressional testimony from the Government Accounting Office that BioPort is having financial difficulties, along with a DOD audit that indicated "substantial doubt that BioPort will be able to continue performing its contract."

The financial mess BioPort finds itself in also has caught the eye of the state of Michigan. Officials there wonder whether BioPort can make an $8.7 million payment by Sept. 4, according to a source familiar with the deal that turned the former state-owned lab over to BioPort for a total price tag of about $24 million.

The advance funds from the Pentagon cannot be used to make the Sept. 4 payment under the terms of the contract signed with the state. BioPort says it has every intention of making its payment deadline as it has on its previous payments. The only technical violation reported against the company is that BioPort has yet to honor product commitments to the state. Part of the state deal called for BioPort to provide rabies vaccine and plasma derivatives. But because BioPort has yet to get Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, approval to run their new lab, they haven't been able to provide the rabies vaccine. Even if BioPort fails to make the Sept. 4 payment, Michigan likely would grant an extension because, as one employee says, "The state doesn't want the bricks back."

Jones also recently contacted BioPort's chief Michigan critic, state Rep. Lingg Brewer, a Democrat. After talking with Brewer, Jones tells Insight, he is going to call for hearings to get to the truth behind the BioPort's contracts and contacts.

BioPort was formed last year primarily to purchase the Michigan Biologic Products Institute, or MBPI, from the state of Michigan. For three decades MBPI had been the sole provider of the anthrax vaccine. When Michigan decided to get out of the vaccine business and sought to find a buyer, BioPort was born.

The deal hardly made a sound on the national scene but certainly caused quite a stir in Michigan. Did Michigan get ripped off when it sold the lab for $24 million? That depends on whom you talk to. Brewer puts it this way: "To say we got ripped off is an understatement. First they ripped off the taxpayers of the state of Michigan and now they are ripping off federal taxpayers."

A state source knowledgeable of the deal praised the sale, saying the state sold it for more than twice what it's worth. At the time the lab had been appraised at $10.5 million. Considering that millions more were needed to be dumped into the lab operations just to get them up to snuff, the state's defenders say the public got out just in time.

Brewer scoffs at that. He saw the potential of the lab to make millions and he thought something was afoul when BioPort turned to former lab directors Robert Myers and Robert van Ravenswaay to help seal the deal. The two state employees initially tried to buy the lab themselves by forming their own company, but withdrew after Brewer called it a "conflict of interest." But then they joined BioPort's team -- and Brewer raised the conflict issue again.

"It was a very dicey situation," Brewer tells Insight. "The buyers became sellers and the sellers became buyers."

Brewer believed it clearly was a conflict of interest for the state employees who ran the lab to bid on it. He filed an ethics complaint, claiming Myers and van Ravenswaay used "confidential information which they had access to as officials of the public MBPI to win the bid." He accuses the two former state employees of "manipulating the purchase price to a lower than a fair value" in their contract with KPMG Peat Marwick, which established the fair-market value, by failing to acknowledge the federal government's interest in purchasing greater quantities of products. Brewer claims the Marwick report is particularly disturbing because Myers and van Ravenswaay had a hand in writing the report as state employees.

Critics of the deal also questioned whether it was wise to turn the lab over to Myers and van Ravenswaay because, when they ran the lab for the state, they had received warning letters from the FDA criticizing them for poor management practices. Neither Myers or van Ravenswaay were available for comment to Insight. However, responding to the criticism, BioPort alleged that the Michigan Legislature had failed to give them the resources to upgrade the facility and instead let the lab slip into total disrepair. The state didn't want to invest millions into the lab. "That's one of the reasons why the state got rid of it" says BioPort spokeswoman Kelly Rossman-McKinney. "Blemishes? Yeah, we got blemishes. But we are doing our damnedest to make a good product because we believe the threat is real."

Nevertheless, the Michigan Ethics Board launched its probe in 1998. But months later the board found that nothing illegal occurred. "We didn't get any standing" says a frustrated Brewer. "We were very disappointed."

Both Myers and van Ravenswaay were helped out by the state Legislature passing Public Act 522 in 1997, which not only authorized the sale of the lab but allowed state employees to bid on it. The law was passed about a year after Myers and van Ravenswaay were approached by BioPort. Similarly, a state circuit-court ruling also agreed with the board's finding.

The deal sailed through. Michigan was promised royalties for five years on commercial sales, which the governor's office projects to be about $1 million a year. BioPort beat out its closest competitor, Gruppo Marcucci, which actually offered more money up front but not as much in the long term. Marcucci made some members on the commission nervous because it is an Italian company -- and the state wanted to award the contract to a U.S. company, according to sources close to the deal.

"Marcucci had slightly more cash but they had one problem" says an inside source. "Federal law prohibits the sale of a sole supplier of the anthrax vaccine to foreign firms. We didn't think it was real smart handing the keys overseas."

But BioPort's chief executive officer, Faud El-Hibri raised a few eyebrows on the commission as well. In 1990, El-Hibri helped facilitate the purchase of anthrax vaccine for Saudi Arabia, which had not been able to obtain it from the U.S. government. According to one commissioner, "We were nervous, certainly, and wondering if he would be selling the vaccine to the Iraqis."

El-Hibri's Middle Eastern connections also apparently triggered some concern -- and at times became a headache for BioPort's public-relations team. "My life would be easier if he didn't have a Middle Eastern descent," says Rossman-McKinney. "Unfortunately people leap to dramatic conclusions."
At the time of the BioPort bid, El-Hibri was a German citizen of Lebanese heritage. He previously had been the biotech director of Proton Products Ltd. in the United Kingdom, which marketed two bio-defense vaccines for botulinum type A and anthrax. In 1996, El-Hibri, upon learning of the pending sale of the Michigan lab, joined forces with Myers, who had formed Michigan Biologic Products, a company trying to acquire the lab. BioPort was incorporated May 12,1998. At the time of the bid, El-Hibri had applied for U.S. citizenship, and the commission became less concerned with his foreign ties. After contacting the U.S. Embassy in Germany and having the deal basically blessed by the Pentagon, the commission became convinced El-Hibri was one of the good guys.

What strikes both Jones and Brewer odd is the lack of national-security or intelligence agencies involved in the bid process. The only checking Michigan did was to call the U.S. embassies in Germany and Italy to check on the two top bidders. Both companies checked out.

"The only time national security was mentioned was they told me I was violating national security for asking questions" Brewer says.

When BioPort is asked about national security, they point to their top gun, retired admiral William J. Crowe Jr., the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ambassador to Britain and chairman of the president's foreign-intelligence advisory board. Crowe is a member of BioPort's board and an icon of the defense establishment. He has known El-Hibri for more than a decade.

Crowe, who served in the Reagan, Bush and Clinton administrations, declined Insight's repeated attempts to be interviewed for this story. But his ties to Clinton are no secret. Outspoken against the Persian Gulf War policy, he endorsed Clinton during the 1992 election, prompting criticism from Republicans. Four years later, El-Hibri turned to Crowe to help acquire the lab. In his June testimony before the House Government Reform subcommittee on National Security, Veterans Affairs and International Relations, El-Hibri says, "Admiral Crowe's background would be important in ensuring that we did everything correctly in establishing a company that would best serve DOD's needs."

BioPort has a five-member board of directors, chaired by El-Hibri. The other members are Crowe, Myron W. Solter, Myers and van Ravenswaay. The stock is split, with 80 percent of the shares voting and 20 percent nonvoting. The nonvoting shares were awarded to each of the 200-plus employees. Reportedly, only half of the employees have received the anthrax-vaccine shot.

Three companies holding voting equity in BioPort are Intervac LLC and Intervac Management LLC, which are Maryland companies, and MBPI, a Michigan corporation. Intervac LLC is the controlling shareholder and is owned by Crowe, El-Hibri, El-Hibri's wife, Nancy, and I and F Holdings N.V., a Netherlands-Antilles investment company owned by El-Hibri's father, Ibrahim El-Hibri. Crowe and El-Hibri are controlling members of Intervac LLC. Crowe's active relationship with BioPort has raised a series of questions about whether the admiral played any role in securing the DOD contract or pushed for what appeared to be the sudden desire to order more than 2 million soldiers to receive only the anthrax shot -- even though they are at risk from many other bioweapons as well.

Rossman-McKinney says Crowe never gave a political donation, and Crowe's longtime spokesman Jay Coupe claims Crowe never put a penny into either Intervac or BioPort. "Admiral Crowe never had any conversation with any member of the administration or Department of Defense in advance of the decision to inoculate the troops" Coupe says. "He was not involved in any way whatsoever. He never spoke to the secretary of defense. He never spoke to the national-security adviser nor anyone else in the government on the issue.... And Admiral Crowe has agreed, along with the board of directors, not to take a dime for five years."

Mark Zaid, a Washington attorney who represents several soldiers refusing to get the inoculation, doesn't buy the argument that Crowe is not going to benefit from the deal. "How much does he make after five years?" Zaid asks. "Millions. I could care less if Crowe was involved. But, morally, it smells."

RELATED ARTICLE: Anthrax Vax for Sale

1990: Faud El-Hibri, BioPort CEO, gets anthrax vaccine for Saudi Arabia, which had been unable to get it from the U.S.

6/96: El-Hibri contacts Dr. Robert Meyers about buying the anthrax-vaccine lab from the state of Michigan.

10/96:$130 million DOD contract with MBP to vaccinate troops becomes public.

11/96: KPMG Peat Marwick states lab's value at $10.5 million.

1/97: Myers and Robert van Ravenswaay file incorporation articles under the name of Michigan Biologic Products, or MBP.

1/97: Michigan permits sale of lab and allows state employees to bid on it.

6/97: Michigan state Rep. Gagliardi appoints state Rep. Brewer to study the sale.

10/97: MBP submits its first bid to purchase the lab.

11/97: Myers and van Ravenswaay's purchase offer is withdrawn, ending conflict of interest.

12/97: U.S. Army says it needs more anthrax vaccine. Michigan says it's ready to supply it. Plans made to inoculate all 2.4 million military personnel because of problems with Iraq.

1/98: Michigan reopens bidding for lab.

6/98: BioPort wins bid with $17 million offer: $2.5 million paid upfront, with the rest paid through a five-year loan. Total deal was about $24 million.

6/90: Brewer files lawsuit for documents concerning the bid.

7/90: U.S. circuit court orders documents produced. They show 32 percent of BioPort owned by Myers and van Ravenswaay.

7/90: State Administrative Board approves BioPort sale.

8/98: Michigan Ethics Board orders check of Brewer's complaint filed against Myers and van Ravenswaay for allegedly violating state ethics laws.

6/99: Meyers and van Ravenswaay cleared.

8/99: North Carolina Rep. Jones asks for DOD probe into BioPort's relationship with the Pentagon. Jones asks Brewer for lab sale documents and calls for congressional hearings.
Back to top

PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:02 pm    Post subject: Guess Who Owns BioPort - Reply with quote

Guess Who Owns BioPort -
The Only US Anthrax
Vaccine Producer? Angry yet? You should be!

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence, clamorous to be led to safety - by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary" H.L. Mencken


Where, oh where to begin!

Well, let's begin with Adm. William J. Crowe Jr. It seems that back when Goerge H. W. Bush was setting up Osama Bin Laden as a Freedom fighter (A "freedom fighter" is the same thing as a terrorist, only aimed at someone you don't like) , the good Admiral (seen right) and his buddies on the Joint Chiefs were selling American made weapons-grade Anthrax to Saddam Hussein in the hopes that he would use it on Iran (and then we wonder why the Iranian people don't much like Americans). Who knows who else got these American-made weapons of mass destruction either from Admiral Crowe or Saddam.

But that was then and this is now. Admiral Crowe is retired. Admiral Crowe is quite wealthy, far beyond what one might expect on even an Admiral's salary. In fact, Admiral Crowe sits on the Board of Directors and owns 13% of BioPort Corporation.

What is the BioPort Corporation, I hear you ask? Well, it's the only corporation in the United States with a license to make Anthrax Vaccine. Except that BioPOrt doesn't actually make the vaccine, BioPOrt simply
bought the lab that does make the vaccine, Michigan Biologic Products Institute, from the State of Michigan in 1998, oddly enough at the same time John J. Maresca, Vice President of International Relations, UNOCAL Corporation, was telling congress that access to the oil reserves under
the Caspian Sea required a new government in Afghanistan.

Along with the actual Anthrax Vaccine, BioPort acquired Michigan Biologic Products Institute's sole and exclusive customer for the vaccine, the U.S. Department of defense. And here is the kicker. Since acquiring Michigan Biologic Products Institute, BioPort has not delivered a drop of the stuff! Only 4% of the vaccine contracted for has
been delivered. FDA audits have uncovered suspicious record keeping and contamination problems, causing the FDA to ban delivery of the product.

Despite this ban, the U.S. Government has continued to front BioPort millions of dollars to kep the operation going. And, given the "State of Emergency", it is likely that FDA concerns for the product will soon be set aside and the vaccine delivered, not to the citizens whose taxes
paid for it all, but to the military and to the government.

So, good old Admiral Crowe and his fellow investors in BioPort are set to make a bundle off of the Anthrax scare. Especially when market demand pushes the price of the product high up above the contracted for $3.50 an ounce. And who are those fellow investors? Well, another part of
BioPort is owned by the Carlyse Group. That's George H. W. Bush's current occupation. Yet another portion is owned by (you had better sit down), the Bin Laden family!

That's right. Just as the Bin Laden family made a fortune with the contract to rebuild the Khobar Towers supposedly blown up by Osama, the Bin Ladens will again make a fortune from their part ownership of the
only company able to make an Anthrax Vaccine in the United States, because Osama might have some of that Anthrax that the United States sold to Saddam.

In fact, the shortage created by the FDA bans will make all the players instant billionaires as market forces drive the price of the vaccine up to thousands of dollars per ounce. (The same amount of Anthrax treatment
Cipro that sells for $20 in India now costs $690 in the US).

A very cozy arrangement. The Bushes and Bin Ladens (and the occasional complicit Admiral) are all making money off of the fear and death of Americans and Afghanis.

It's called "profiteering".

It's called conspiracy with a foreign power against the interests of the people of the nation.

This sort of thing is what got Charles the First into trouble!

Original article at
Back to top

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:26 am    Post subject: Let's stay the course here Reply with quote

It's important we don't lose perspective as to why Gary wrote his book Vaccine-A. While economic conspiracy theories may play a part, Gary's main purpose is to get the word out to protect our troops from a harmful ingredient they're putting in Biothrax. Let's fight this war one battle at a time. While I won't deny the contextual elements of Crowe et al are a player, an "over emphasis" on this matter detracts from Gary's main thesis and his forum--we need to ACT--for the safety of our troops! Exclamation
Back to top

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 6:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Christophe for pointing this out! I also think it's important to focus on the real, core issues that require immediate and legitimate answers:

(1) Why do only certain lots of vaccine contain quantities of squalene, and why do these lots happen to contain amounts that are perfect base 10 multipiles of squalene concentrations?

(2) Why do only vets injected with the anthrax vaccine from squalene containing lots have antibodies present in their systems?

(3) Why is DoD pushing to re-introduce the vaccine possibly by faking an immediate anthrax attack threat?

(4) Why is DoD hinting that mass (mandatory) vaccinations may be required for civilians?

(5) Is there any real evidence that enemies of the US actually posses weaponized anthrax that they intend to deploy on overseas battlefields or at home?
Back to top
forrest shalom

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 3:27 pm    Post subject: told you so! Reply with quote

thank you for providing more details about the bioport/elitist/moslem
connection. ( i had brought this issue up earlier as well).

america and the west is being flushed down a one way toilet into the mouth
of the jihad and there is no national salvation offered.


weep not for your country but SAVE YOURSELF
Back to top

PostPosted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:01 pm    Post subject: Why do good people do bad things? Reply with quote

This article appears to underscore MOTIVE. Gary has given a strong argument this can be seen as one motive.
Back to top

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you want to honestly help, start by signing this petition.
Back to top
RobertW of Alabama

PostPosted: Wed Jan 05, 2005 2:58 pm    Post subject: Prosecute Corruption-Protect Soldiers Reply with quote

My opinion is that the above story concerning BioPort, MBPI, multinational corporate participation, Admiral Crowe and unethical influence over contracts and vaccination practices hits right at the root of the problem. The Motive behind the crime. Money. A potential deterrent to the crime, Jail, public humimiation and denouncement from the Military, Congress and the President.

While I might have to concede that Mr Matsumoto's motive was to protect soldiers. I personally believe that they will be much more likely to be protected when the executives in both government and industry go to jail for their corruption and conflicts of interests. Manufacturing a need, obtaining contracts that defy logic, promoting "scare"... these are evil and corrupt deeds. If these men went to prison for improperly influencing contracts and perhaps manfacturing a need (anthrax mail scare?- this is a multinational company with unlimited financial and sufficient biological resources) ... if the possibility of these misdeeds were eliminated then soldiers would not be threatened by vaccines they do not need manfactured with substances that are not approved.

Certainly one might argue that the ENRON scandal and it's subsequent effects on ethics in the market might support my argument.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Perseus Books Group Message Boards Forum Index -> Vaccine-A All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP