LMW writes,

"It's less than a year since Cheney thought dressing up SpecOps or SEALS or whatever as Iranians might be a good idea and we already know about it, and it didn't happen. Cooler heads prevailed, and even leaked it."

Thank goodness! But in which MSM papers/sites did this information appear? If it appeared at all it was very few, to my knowledge, and they certainly didn't dwell on such horrific news. To even suggest such a thing SHOULD be headline news everywhere.

Rouge elements, indeed!

All I'm saying is Glenn tends to portentously string series of facts together in ways that I think are intended to lead the reader to a place that Glenn himself carefully does not go.

Do you realise what you just said? I wonder what Glenn might think of that little compliment.

BTW, how did you come up with the 80%?

Rouge elements, indeed!

Look, they were going to dress as Iranians, he wasn't asking them to cross-dress, and there was no mention of make-up.

"Do you realise what you just said? I wonder what Glenn might think of that little compliment.

BTW, how did you come up with the 80%?"

I said right after that: some like it; I don't. I think he should say what he's getting at.

80 -- that's an estimate, dude. Read in a number you agree with if you don't agree with that, I don't care.

Sure, that might be right. I thought I saw quite a few new handles, and many of then were people writing just to praise Glenn's initiative in this and tell how affected they were by the posts. They did produce a lot, a real lot of purely positive feedback.

But you seem to think he's a manipulative hack? I don't know how else to interpret the ""portentous..."

All this stuff about conspiracy theories yet again. When you've seen news reports with reporters from Fox and CNN who are standing on the sidewalk on September 11 watching all of it happen (none of us were there but they were)and they keep talking about 'bombs going off' in the Twin Towers and another reporter stands in front of the Pentagon and says 'You'd never know a plane had ever been here' and Larry(Midas) Silverstein says he told the fire department to 'pull' i.e. demolish building no. 7 and now you know this anthrax came from a US military laboratory- what the hell do you need? Do you need God to descend from on high and say 'Look, I hate to tell you this but your own government attacked you on 9/11 and oh, by the way, they sent the anthrax letters too. See ya later.' The faith of some people in the Bush administration borders on the completely delusional. Like the way some Germans couldn't believe Hitler would kill those nice Jewish people who fought in World War I and were decorated soldiers. Is it something they put in the water? Or is it just a complete inability to put facts together and come up with the truth because you've allowed Bill O'Reilly to pollute your brain or you've smoked too much dope, or spent too much time watching 'Meet the Fuckers' sorry 'Press'. The media in Australia has gone absolutely quiet on the whole anthrax story as the horrible implications have set in. They would now rather touch a putrifying cat than this story but of course the US media have their orders (achtung!) and will carry them out. All the people who told me I needed psychiatric evaluation re 9/11 have also gone very quiet. My brother shouted 'They did not!' went white and nearly passed out the first time I told him what I believed. I've had incredible rows with people over it for years now but the facts are the facts and no intelligent person can ignore them however ghastly the implications. The world's media should be ashamed of themselves(the fools) and would be if they knew the meaning of shame. As for Bush and Cheney: they're war criminals but so is Henry Kissinger and a cast of thousands. So far the 21st century looks worse than the 20th and the people who are making it like that are the same ones who did it in the 20th: a Bush, a Rumsfeld, a Cheney and a Kissinger. What would terrorism be without them? If they're allowed to get away with this it will only get worse from here on in. Remember the guy who was supposed to have burned the Reichstag down in Berlin so that Hitler could blame it on the Communists? That's where Ivins comes in. He was a registered Democrat wasn't he? And his brother even said he was a 'wussy man'? Makes it all the more likely he'd send anthrax to Leahy and Daschle and other filthy liberals, doesn't it? What an inspiration Hitler is for Bush and Cheney and their clone McCain. Not to mention Stalin. Monty Python couldn't write this stuff. It needs the surreal gifts of a Mr. Bean or a Dr. Who to do it justice.

-Isn't the Post a Murdoch rag? So this must be the official government version of the story-

Finally.

This has to be the biggest time-lag yet for the right-wing assholes to develop their talking points.

See you this week.

Ivins, persecuted by the gun-nuts for being a rogue gun-nut.

Pictures at eleven.

In spite of the reference to porn that Iveins liked that involves women being blindfolded (as proof of what, I'm not sure...I know plenty of women that liked..to me.. the creepy movie 9 1/2 weeks) it seems that some reporters are becoming intrigued.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/washington/05anthrax.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&ref=us&oref=slogin

It raises some interesting questions.

When you paste a link from the New York Times, you can paste only up to the .html and it will still be the same page. For instance, the link AnnieW just pasted can also be pasted

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/washington/05anthrax.html

easier to read.