Gillmor and Rosen--sweeeet!

Hey ABC, that sound you hear...kind of rumble like noise mixed with the unmistakable sound of cracking wood...

Don't worry it's nothin.

Why is it OK to put a media bow on this?

I don't think it is OK at all. I think it is sleazy underhanded behavior on the part of the FBI. The FBI is perfectly capable of proving protection for Jean Duley. Why they encouraged Duley to seek a restraining order is a question the FBI should be forced to answer. Along with many others.

I question her lurid allegations, think they were fed to her, and think she should have been more careful before regurgitating them.

Are you suggesting that Ivins' alleged statements during group therapy, presumably in front of other patients, was fabricated by Duley at the behest of the FBI?

I appreciate, and I’m sure Glenn does too, that you are standing tall for the profession you love and teach. I don’t have to tell you, your profession is in real danger when it abandons bringing out the unvarnished truth as the primary guiding principle. Every person and organization makes mistakes. The mistake is greatly compounded when the person or organization refuses to admit that mistake and then continues to repeat that mistake or makes new ones because nothing was learned. We have seen the results of a president who does that far too often. Especially since 2000, we have seen a significant degradation in the principles of journalism by major media organizations.

We especially need those who teach journalism to not only educate their students. We need you to educate the American people of how dangerous this trend is and how much damage has already been done. Even when the three branches of our government are out of balance or compromised, the fourth estate can bring things back into balance. Journalists are our last line of defense. If they (you) fail, we all fail. Thanks for playing your part and I hope you can enlist a large number of your colleagues to join you.

proving with providing

I don't know either. But there are multiple distrusts going on (not surprising since many of the players don't seem worthy of trust) and I was just trying to point out that falsifying a suicide requires participation of people with no reason to help -- firefighter/paramedics, police, the M.E., the hospital staff and MDs, and on and on. So probably that isn't where anyone is going to find great nefariousness. It's reasonable that he commit suicide, that it was tylenol+codeine, that his liver failed, etc.

The rest of it stinks. Duley probably panicked: she believes he is the anthrax killer. If he reels off a threat, she is going to take it as a threat from a murderer who has been successful before. But she doesn't need to divulge his whole psychological record to get a restraining order, all she needs to say is that he had been picked up as a danger to others and he threatened her.

How did she get all the information about the investigation? She was supposed to testify, yes, but it was a closed door proceeding. Did the FBI tell her? That's not correct on their part. What she did to get the restraining order isn't correct. The fact that the investigation went nowhere until the Democrats were poised to take control of Congress stinks. The story to Brian Ross stinks. The fact that he was found unconscious once previously stinks. The observation revealed nothing? Days after he gets out of observation he commits suicide. Why was he found unconscious in March?

Tonkin Gulf Incident. The commonality is indisputable once you look at it.

The 2001 anthrax poisonings case has "false flag" written all over it. The warmongers in the U.S. and Israeli governments had every reason to decide on something as drastic--and dramatic--as this to whip up hysteria against Iraq.

Regarding the late "suspect" Bruce Ivins: What role (if any) did he play in all this? The MSM? They should reveal who lied to 'em, and why they ran with the lies.

If I were a theripist, and my FBI BFF even hinted to me that my client was the elusive author of these shy billets doux, I might embroider him a noose. A tapestry, even.

Exactly right. Tarasoff has been taught in 1L torts classes ever since, because its holding rapidly spread to be the law in other jurisdictions. (I do not recall all the specifics -- law school was ages ago -- but I think the patient in Tarasoff eventually burned down his father's barn.)

But therapists do not generally make an announcement to their patients along these lines: "If you threaten to harm another and I deem you serious, I owe you no duty of confidentiality as to that issue." It is considered widely known.

Actually, that is a more recent Vermont case, the name escapes me, where the court's ruling seemed to expand the duty to protect property as well as persons. No one was injured in that case, just a barn. Barns must be important in Vermont. In Tarasoff, Tanya Tarasoff was stabbed and killed. I'm not surprised Tarasoff isn't law in Texas. That's whay I said "most states".

If The FBI told me my client had been dangerous and at large for decades, I would believe every single message I heard on my voicemail that week.

But I am not your theripist. Lucky you.

I liked the metaphorical rendition because pottery can hold water but still retains certain characteristics of clay.

The question very well may be, not if Duley was trying to drive Ivins crazy, but was the FBI trying to drive Duley crazy.

Or maybe the FBI was trying to drive Duley crazy to drive Ivins crazy to drive me crazy.

This whole thing is so weird.

RM Patriot, have you thought about the recent BIG DEAL made by GWB about his authorizing the $$$BILLIONS for AIDS in Africa? In light of Dr Horowitz's work and Kissinger's demands that the world's population must be reduced by 2/3 in order for the food production to be sufficient for the other 1/3 . . . well, it makes me ponder about that "help".

The truth behind these 'big aid deals' for Africa and most other countries (except probably Israel and Pakistan) is that they might 'pledge' to give billions but they actually give a small percentage of that money. It's a 'feel good' gesture and nothing more. It's as a matter of fact what turned me against Bono and his hypocrisy train a few years ago. He touted our George Walker Bush as a 'great humanitarian' for pledging billions to Africa and other nations and only actually gave something like 10% of that pledged amount and yet Bono was all grateful and kissy face for the crumbs...

Yeah... He's a humanitarian and my dog is Albert Einstein. Remember the low ball offer after the tsunami? I'll bet that is more like what they got from Bushistan then what he was goaded into 'giving'.

And in the end, what good is the billions in aid if the Bushistas still gag the organizations about birth control, rubbers and abortion? It sounds like his backdoor action to placate the 'religious' right and spread some o' that olde time religion (Money) around for McCain... It's back to condemning ignorant people by ignorant people.

The American Taliban exporting, by force, their beliefs that sex is bad and people just need to say no. It obviously worked so well for Bush's alcoholism, don't cha know... Fighting condoms and abortions in the third world should put Bushist ministers up for crimes against humanity! I for one demand a refund. How much money should it cost to have people say that condoms don't work and abortion is bad. Not '$$$BILLIONS'. More like $2.95.