I may be mistaken, but I think that the "Ames strain" is a replicated genotype ... much as is done with lab rats so that all sorts of "individual difference" are eliminated, making clinical results "purer" ...

Do you have a cite for this?

From a previous post you said--

yes, she claims to be repeating what his psychiatrist said, but we have proof the PsychMD said any such thing 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.

The court looked at the evidence and granted a restraining order.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0801081anthrax5.html

Considering the petition and evidence, the Court finds reasonable grounds to believe that Respondent:

1. Has committed the following act(s) against the Petitioner within 30 days before filing of the Petition:

Place Person Eligible for relief in fear of imminent seriously bodily harm

Harassment

You are free to argue based on any evidence you can present that the Courts decision was in error, but this statement by you--

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

--is obviously wrong.

I see that the current opinion on the anthrax case is that Ivins was in it alone. No one has speculated on whether any others were involved.

I doubt that the newspaper letter establishes any such connection. To understand that you have to read the crap in the newspaper article to which Dr. Bruce Ivins was responding.

You can do that by looking at earlier comments on mine on this thread, or else clicking on my signature.

Sorry about the headline.

Recently i posted of a historian on C-Span, i think, tying African shipping lane tribute payments back to George Washington's time under the label of 'muslim terrorists'

I'm sure he was patriotically proud of his scholarly work of convenient assistance to the permanent war machine cartel.

I protested it then.

I despise it now.

As the Iran attack trial balloon may yet deflate, the anthrax conspiracy points in the same direction as WMD and Al Qaeda in 2001 Iraq: To liars plotting and placing seeds of deception under clandestine and extralegal covers of sinister collaboration.

Much of it will stay buried.

But not all.

Scary stuff, GG.

You are in the prayers of many grateful advocates, and, no doubt, the spiritual hierarchy of the planet.

ABC was already my favorite network boycott target.

Please, all, give that some imaginative attention. They've been poisoning the political airwaves unchecked for decades.

As we attune to each new path of revelation piercing the shrouds of secret paragovernmental corruption and institutional deception, increasingly it becomes more apparent that the most vicious and and murderous collection of terrorist activities originate homegrown.

Bring on the law, now.

And the courage to face the mirror.

Thank you Mr. Greenwald. Thank you, sir.

Thank you for another excellent article, Glenn. This article is the most explosive topic I can ever remember in any newspaper, news program, or blog, in my lifetime. This story and its implications has the potential to unravel and disembowel our government and our supposed news agencies. Quite frankly, both corrupt entities need to be scrapped and built again from scratch.

I have a question for you, Glenn. Where can we find the list of ABC sponsors? I believe if we write to the ABC sponsors with this news, along with a boycott en masse of their products, then ABC might reconsider its choice to continue this criminal conspiracy upon the American people.

Secondly, I believe it is imperative for all of us to write to Senator Leahy in particular, and to the Congress to DEMAND an immediate investigation into these crimes. These are serious crimes. Dare I say treason?

It is up to us. ALL OF US. If we do nothing, these actions will continue, and we will lose what is left of our beloved country to these criminals. We deserve better than this. Our children deserve better than this. But, we will not stop this treason against our country, and its people, unless and until we fight with everything we are, and everything we have against this treason. We must do this en masse. And we must do this NOW.

It is apparent that John McCain is involved in this cover up,whether he is involved wittingly or unwittingly. We don't know the full extent of his involvement. We need the answers BEFORE the election. Our lives depend on it.

I've used bentonite many times. It's used to clarify my claret. I never tried using anthrax. But I did dump a few grams of coke in the barrel in my time. That's almost as good, isn't it?

I have so many questions and concerns swirling around my head and have only been able to catch the last few letters. Here are just a few thoughts:

1. about protecting sources. I think there's some distinction to be made if the act of telling the reporter something is itself illegal, as in the Judith Miller case re the outing of Valerie Plame. IE, there should have been no protecting of sources going on there b/c the reporters KNEW that a crime had been committed BY THE SOURCE by virtue of the leak itself. Does this make sense? I'm trying to figure out if this anthrax/ABC situation somehow falls into the same category. I guess probably not, but it feels close, doesn't it?

2. About Ivins' guilt. I'm remembering Vince Foster's suicide as described in HRC's memoir, and it was a sad case of being hounded by the Repub Congress for crimes he/the Clintons didn't commit. He got very depressed about the nature of politics and the partisan disregard for truth that was being demonstrated and felt completely helpless about disabusing the media/whoever about the untruths flying around. He just got lower and lower and wanted out. I think it's important to remember that suicide is a reaction to major depression, and it's really easy to see how an assault by the FBI and media could completely overwhelm someone's sense of equanimity, esp if they know quite intimately that justice is not being served. I can see a case for his being clinically depressed b/c he was NOT guilty just as much as if he WAS guilty.

3. I've often wondered why the media didn't cover the anthrax story like they covered everything else. It's such an exciting and sexy story, all humanity aside for a minute; what's up with the noncoverage? Is Richard Cohen's story a window into the media's fear about their own vulnerability? B/c media types were themselves targets, was there some kind of magical thinking going on--like, if we don't breathe (cover it), it won't come back...?