As a chap who's rubbed the wrong way by the "case closed" attitude of smug dismissal towards 9/11 truth-seekers-- including those who've wielded Occam's Razor harum-scarum, like a switchblade in an old-fashioned rumble to slash away legitimate skepticism-- I've been gratified to read quite a few comments, here and elsewhere, from people who are sufficiently shaken up by this anthrax story to question their own complacency.

I would be gratified if the anthrax story served as a catalyst for reviving interest in the great unsolved mystery of the events of 9/11; like one of those colossal jigsaw puzzles, fitting together the anthrax caper may even reveal direct relationships, or common denominators, that would shed light on both subjects.

All that said, I respectfully ask that the comments to Glenn's posts about the anthrax story not include gratuitous references to the 9/11 mystery.

My quite selfish request arises from the fact that I can't access Salon comments at work-- so I've been plowing through them afterwards. I know I'm not absorbing the enormous amount of information as it is; my eyeballs feel like the spinning lemons of a slot machine in use.

Gratuitous 9/11 references make an already overwhelmingly turbid issue that much more volatile, IMHO, and they're a distraction to boot.

I've got blood oozing out of my ears as it is just trying to process all of the anthrax-related stuff. Thanks for your consideration!

• I know I should have resisted mentioning Lincoln, but what other Abe could I have used that would work with my acronym? | Retired Military Patriot - 8:04

Why, none other than Abe Simpson, Homer Simpson's dad and WWII hero for his exploits with the Fighting Hellfish!

________________________________________

• I'm donating but not as much as I originally intended. [...] | aghorn - 08:02

My left hand doesn't know what my right hand is doing (don't worry, both hands are above my waist). But I've covered Corporal Aghorn's deficit...

________________________________________

• I did that when I contributed to the ACLU and the EFF during the telecom immunity fight, and now I'm inundated with email appeals to donate more to them and to other related causes. [...] And if you want my money (which, in the case of Accountability Now, I'm dying to give you), please accept it without the strings that clutter my inbox and fill my evenings with the ring of the telephone. Cause that's the only way you're gonna get it. | Ufansius - 10:03

FWIW, some time ago my sister literally warned me off donating to the ACLU, which she had done in good faith, because she was furious at being relentlessly inundated and squeezed by ACLU and related organizations. I agree that regardless of how worthy the cause, there's a threshold past which solicitation becomes abusive and off-putting; I guess they aren't about to make it easy to not be nagged. (I don't answer callers I don't recognize on my Caller ID-- could one recent persistent caller listed as "TEXAS" be a political solicitation?)

________________________________________

• I presume Derbig is joshin' us, but I'm looking forward to Glenn's return to the anthrax story. There's a steady dribble of purportedly damning information to confirm the Lone Nut theory. Incidentally-- not to try to hijack this thread-- after a few days of melting my head by skimming through the threads when I got home from work, I'm a bit surprised that so many commenters have concluded that the suicide itself is to be taken at face value.

Since we're in the comments horse latitudes before Glenn's next post, I'll offer the trivial observation that I'd never seen/heard Thomas Frank on the air before, AFAIK; I couldn't take his bubbling, somewhat manic style on yesterday's "Democracy Now". It really got in the way.

Maybe it was me; I unexpectedly had my first tooth extraction as an adult earlier this week-- molar #19-- and I'm still grieving.

But I think Frank would benefit from Glenn's services as an Understatement Coach.

No offense to LWM, but FWIW, I have the same reaction to use of casual terms like "nutbar", though I'm not too precious to occasionally use them in casual everyday conversation.

I also have exactly the same antipathy for the term "whiner". Because it's too close to home? Could be, but that's for others to judge. ;)

No, it's because such terms are too loaded and pejorative in connotation; they reveal more about the mind-set of the user than the referent they purport to denote.