I'm sure this case is like Bush's Kangaroo courts in Guantanamo, if you can make it look like a suicide, you can close the case.

AND this after all the lies from ABC and the rest of evidence that Iraq did it.

Bush is so ugly, so ugly.

Not that a couple pistols would actually stop whoever will be sent to start rounding us up, but I'd hate to be the first agent who busts through my door.

"The cheaper the crook, the gaudier the patter"- Sam Spade in "The Maltese Falcon"

Why, cause they'll have to watch you shit yourself?

How the hell did you do that?

Anyway, although tiny-URL is a good thing, I don't think it is necessary here. But how did you do that? If the system doesn't accept URLs in the text, you can't "break it" with a long URL, right? Hmmm. Must be magic.

Travelers' Laptops May Be Detained At Border: No Suspicion Required Under DHS Policies

By Ellen Nakashima, Washington Post Staff Writer, Friday, August 1, 2008; Page A01 (see sig)

Federal agents may take a traveler's laptop or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, as part of border search policies the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed.

Also, officials may share copies of the laptop's contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption or other reasons, according to the policies, dated July 16 and issued by two DHS agencies, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

"The policies . . . are truly alarming," said Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), who is probing the government's border search practices. He said he intends to introduce legislation soon that would require reasonable suspicion for border searches, as well as prohibit profiling on race, religion or national origin.

DHS officials said that the newly disclosed policies -- which apply to anyone entering the country, including U.S. citizens -- are reasonable and necessary to prevent terrorism. Officials said such procedures have long been in place but were disclosed last month because of public interest in the matter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/content/article/2008/08/01/laptops.html

Paste in a long url into your comment, and you will become a magician.

and there's nothing to indicate the cops or the court corroborated her claims.

She may well have had reason to be frightened. He may have been so upset that he was frightening. That does not mean he actually constituted a threat. Better safe than sorry, and yet he's being libeled (It's on his public permanent record) based apparently on hearsay.

=========================================================

Apparently his coworkers are very upset and believe he was innocent and hounded to suicide ... very sad.

Nothing I've read indicates a deeply ANGRY man ... I think the person who mailed the anthrax was deeply angry.

I remain uncertain if the mailer intended to harm anyone -- scare them certainly -- but I suspect the reason the letters stopped was because the "scheme" got all.fucked.up. as more and more contamination was found and more and more people got sick. Cipro coulda/woulda/shoulda done the trick with the intended recipients ... the collateral damage was unanticipated ... the envelopes leaked... bad job...

We may never know how the anthrax letters were intended to culminate -- with a ransom demand perhaps? if not, what/why were they sent?

Okay, you guys are playing tricks on me! I think it's because it's all one word, so it screws up the line breaks, like this:

ThisisnotaURLbutit'sallgoingtobeonewordandscrewupthelinebreakwhatweintheprintingtradeusedtocallthejustificationbutyouknowjustificationisalsoanessentialwordinthelexiconoftheology

Hah! The case of the mysterious URL where none should be is closed!

If you can find any time in between mocking my paranoid (yet apparently somehow braggadocious) ramblings and memorizing old Humphrey Bogart movies, feel free to address what I said with any kind of logical retort.

Several people besides me have correctly stated an inescapable fact: If even 1/10 of the fishiness of this entire story has any substance behind it, then this amounts to a very high-level coup attempt, not to mention treason against my entire country. MY country.

I realize that my pathetic mention of physical resistance (or at least the possibility of physically resisting) to an encroaching military-style dictatorship over the internet does nothing but highlight the sheer impotence of my so-called manhood, but if you could see past all that I'd love to hear a real thought on the topic.

'Cause I'm as cynical as the next person, but this seems like some pretty sobering shit even to me.

Now we know the validity of you wife's thoughts about your intelligence.

the role played by ABC News in this episode is the single greatest, unresolved media scandal of this decade

Based on what I know, it seems reasonable to me that ABC initially reported it the way they did. "High-placed sources at USAMRIID" would have seemed credible at the time. Why would ABC ignore those sources and only report on the administration's denials? A lot of important stories would go unreported if journalists followed that rule.

So I'd tend to put the blame for the initial "Sources say X, administration says Y" news reports squarely on the propagandizers, because I don't see how ABC could have judged the USAMRIID sources as any more or less credible than the White House sources, at the time.

The issue for ABC may be how much follow-up investigation they (and other news outlets) did on this story -- especially once it became clear that that the attacks were an inside job, and that people at USAMRIID might have been involved.

Other thing to consider is that maybe bentonite was found in the anthrax. It seems like you're reasoning that since the attacks were an inside job, therefore the anthrax could not have contained bentonite. But aren't there other possibilities? Like maybe it isn't true that only Iraq uses bentonite. Or maybe people at USAMRIID had some anthrax that had been produced in Iraq.

More investigative journalism (is there such a thing anymore?), and a Congressional investigation, as you mentioned, would be welcome.