Letters to the Editor
-
What do you they when busted?
1) Does this method sound familiar? "Real" content delivered in a flawed vessel/format ala Dan Rather and Bush's military document memo?
2) I have some experience with people denying they said exactly what they said. They will use any and all excuses possible to deny first that they said it. Then if you play back their exact words and you prove that it is not a lie, then, "It's out of context!"
If you show them the context doesn't change anything then, "You are twisting my words with a raised eyebrow!"
I'm going to go with Smac. Look at the content.
But I do want you all to remember, they like to use things like "The kearning is wrong" to get you distracted from the issues."
Would they (Boylan's supporters within the military) send a letter to one of their most influential critics that says what they want, but via a "spoofed" IP address so that they can point to the spoofing and not the content? I think if we push back to the widest verifiable IP address it appears that they do have access to .mil. That is significant.
And by the way, just because more than one person attempts to cover up or entrap someone doesn't mean that those people know about each other and are working together. The working together part is what people focus on, but if a bunch of people all separately decide to do the same stuff it doesn't make it a conspiracy theory. It does point out the broader frame work that they all share, which is important for people to understand.
-
Vermont identity theft?
"If you do a search on the web, you will also see that I have been a victim of identity theft of late in Vermont..."
FWIW, I did a search on the terms--
Boylan +"identity theft" +iraq +vermont
--and came up empty.
-
I chuckle for want of crying. O, to be a bystander and thinking of a hemp rope.
Kitt- You always make me laugh, and sometimes cry.
O, we were all born at a early age, and here we are...lovable.
O, humans of some particular chronological age, here we are.
O, no ask why?
In perfect accord, and harmony.
Believe this or not- I feel like,
O, a bowl of some mushy corn hominy ~^~
-
Somebody is in big trouble
From the email headers it appears that both emails originate from the same server and IP address.
This is very interesting.
My theory based based upon the evidence we have so far, listed in the most likely order.
1) The email was sent by an underling of Boylan without his permission. A court-martial awaits for computer crime with national security implications.
2) Boylan wrote the email and is completely off his rocker.
3) A third party did some heavy duty hacking and or forgery and if caught will spend a long time in a federal jail. This is serious business with large national security implications.
No matter how this resolves there is a story here.
-
FYI
GG is updating often. He is up to VI.
-
@Glenn Greenwald re: Update VI
Glenn,
I reiterate my earlier remark: Boylan is saying, "Thanks for bringing this to my attention: I am alarmed by the security breach and am currently looking into it." However, because he is a Bush-era military type, this translates into the Steve-McQueen-style-macho growl: "Interesting email."
It follows that when you asked for a more clear and polite response, his hackles went up and he growled the line about how his actions "don't concern you." It's all part of the swaggering and posturing these types do when confronted by civilians, journalists, or both. It's reminiscent of Vietnam-era confrontational language, actually.
-
Um ...
I don't claim to be an expert or anything, but if someone can send fake e-mails from the PR agent of a general in the United States military that look authentic isn't that a pretty big deal for some fairly obvious reasons?
Say, for example, hypothetical identity theft Boylan starts emailing people saying Petraeus can't waits to start killing him some Iranians.
How could this possibly be something that isn't that big a deal?
-
casual_observer
"I'm speculating here, but fwiw, it seems to me that the person who sent the emails is not a native english speaker."
Are you trying to imply that George W Bush sent the emails?
-
email
As others have indicated, unless the military has made some colossal blunders in setting up its email system, the message was sent from his account, and probably from his computer.
I can't really think of any plausible scenario that involves someone other than him or a close coworker sending such an email to you.
-
Engage Salon's IT
Whoever runs salon's email system should be engaged to investigate this.
Assuming it is a hoax, the perpetrator would have needed the email address and header information for the infantile colonel, and could get it in a few places:
- the Col's laptop
- Glenn's laptop
- the MIL email server
- Salon's email server
Right now, occam's razor has me leaning towards "this is genuine" and this insufferable twit sent this email in a fit of pique, and now regrets it, and is playing dumb.
If it is faked, to what end? No obvious motive comes to mind that adequately explains this (particularly since it has been months since Glenn corresponded with this guy, so why now?).
My other suggestion would be to find the Army's Inspector General and make a sincere request for investigation of possible email spoofing of high ranking military officers, and such would be a security problem worth checking into.
-
casual observer: al Qaeda?
If al Qaeda had hacked into the Army's intranet in Iraq, would they really waste their time sending goofy emails to Glenn? Really?
-
What a weasel!
This Boylan guy sounds like a prototypical Bushie. Reading his e-mails is like watching Gonzo claim that there is no habeas corpus guarantee in the constitution or Condi trying to tapdance around the title of a Presidential Daily Brief. Where do they find these stooges?
-
Swift Loris:
About the "vermont identity theft" that was stunningly asinine on the Col's part. As if it was common knowledge that he had been victim of identity theft and glenn should have known.
And yeah, I doubt the ID theft of a colonel would make the news, so how the hell would we check this, unless it reached the public domain?
It smells like unverifiable bullshit to cover up his regret for sending this email.