You'll be waiting a long time, Jordan.

Yes, I realize this; but it's worth calling him out just to try to improve the rhetorical quality of the debate. I have several Conservative friends (war supporters etc.) whom I enjoy debating with because they argue coherently and make sense, rather than lying back in the tall grass and poring over liberal blogs and posts searching for trivial or nonexistent "gotcha" contradictions (mostly in the form of accusations of "hypocrisy" which do not deny the accusations but instead attempt to unseat or weaken the position of the accusing party).

I figure it's worth a try. He can think and put a sentence together; he must be capable of a straight unembellished contention, rather than easily-deflected attempts at "undermining" statements by Greenwald and others.

I was looking for more samples of his prose, but this is a really interesting piece of work. He is defending the use of white phosphorus, and having trouble.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/08/1516232

His diction seems better than his email prose, but that isn't uncommon. His attitude seems identical.

"Wow, I laud your readers for having the patience and resolve to indulge your verbose tirades. Day after day, I note that your column receives among the most comments. Your readers deserve a medal. You might want to throw them a bone and get to your point in the first paragraph. Assuming you have a point."

Thanks for checking in, keeping track, and complementing GG readers. Which might be a bit self-indulgent since you seem to be a regular, if somewhat partial-reader. I know reading more than one paragraph at a time is "hard work". Which is probably how in the name of all that is holy, the "point" about the military colluding with conservative media was missed.

So keep checking in, try a little more reading and enjoy the comprehension level going up at least a bit.

RICE, POWELL, PETRAEUS, MUKASEY, GATES ETC., ETC.

THEY MAY HAVE STARTED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS, BUT DEVELOP DISEASED MINDS, INFECTED BY THE WHITE HOUSE HAS DRIVEN ALL ORIGINAL MAJOR CHARACTERS OUT, EXCEPT THE TWO WHO CAN ONLY BE IMPEACHED TO BE REMOVED.

BUSH HAS SNUBBED HIS NOSE AT THE LEGISLATIVE AND THE JUDICIARY,

DOING JUST WHAT HE WANTS, LEGAL OR NOT, WITH LITTLE CONFRONTATION FROM ANYONE IN POWER.

THE RECENT WAR PROTESTS THIS LAST WEEKEND ARE A BEGINNING, LIKE THOSE DURING THE VIETNAM ERA, THAT CONTRIBUTED TO IT'S END.

THIS IS A SPARK WHICH SHOULD GROW INTO A CONFLAGRATION OF OPPOSITION, AND END THIS NIGHTMARE BUSH HAS WROUGHT UPON THE NATION

"The fact that the White House dispatched to Iraq a pure political hack -- the former Bush/Cheney '04 communications official -- to incorporate into the U.S. military those communications techniques is obvious evidence of the White House's deliberate effort to politicize the military's war communications."

Exactly. Boylan didn't even need to open his mouth. This already proved that this administration is turning the military into a propaganda outlet, accessible only to the right. But it's great that he did; we got a good taste of what he calls 'comic relief'.

But you have to ask yourself, why would they expose themselves to the real questions that only dissenters can ask? Why would they? After all, it's not as if the army is unaffiliated anymore. Boy, I think all this chumminess with the Pakistani army has had an effect. Our army has learned some valuable lessons from them.

But don't worry. The time of reckoning is near. Whether it's Hillary or Obama, heads will roll.

I don't have to talk to you, since a journalist with ethical standards is what you aren't. I am interested only in matters military. It would be a fabrication unworthy of my time to say that not at all disinterested in this be I.

And one more thing, add I will: identity theft sucks. As does posting on the web under a stolen name, neither of which interested in I am.

The thing that gets me about binary thinkers is how much they remind me of the school aged kids who form the circle around two others in a fight. The apparent hard-wired need to immediately take sides. Lots of folks commenting here reverted to a "check it out," "maybe it's a hoax," "wonder what this is about" position. As might be predicted, then the efforts to try to verify began in earnest. And, we're still willing to entertain those among us who wonder if the verification we've achieved is sufficient. Two entirely different demonstrations of analytic process. I suspect many of us still qualify our condemnation of Boylan's unsolicited email with the unspoken, but conscious thought, "to the extent it is affirmed Boylan sent the email."

And, Cordelia, if Boylan's email header was sooooo super secret, why use that route to communicate with Glenn? If it's 'classified' Boylan exposed it himself. It's not Glenn's job to protect him from his own stupidity.

When I read the exchange of emails I could only come to one conclusion: this guy shows typical right-wing paranoia. He's a good candidate for Hate Radio when he retires from the military.

Whatever else one might think about the views I have expressed, I don't think anyone can say I was anything but professional and civil in all of my interactions with him

I got a much different impression of your emails to Boylan today. Your inquiries weren't very polite, they were unfriendly and presumptuous, Theyy had a snarky tone of entitlement to knowlege of things which could not concern you. Treatment such as that would hardly tempt me to be explicit.

I think it's clear Boylan's opinion of you is not the highest, and he clearly isn't anxious to share a great deal with you about his more private concerns.

It's possible to fake an IP, and fake it to match the others. In the light most favorable to his answers to you, Boylan seems to me a natural target the kind of hacking that could account for a fake email reaching you.

Why do you want to know more about the letter though? Assuming the worst, why worry about it much? If it doesn't reflect you or who you are or what you write about, will not your own character speak for itself?