I am glad that there is skepticism over the MSM account of Ivins and this charming loser Jean Duley. Given the history of the Anthrax Attack story including over-hyped and dishonest leaks from secret Bush Admin. sources that have been well documented here and the false-start focus on Mark Hatfill, now being remunerated by the govt for their abuses, it is appropriate to wonder how much of the true story we have access to at this point.

On a week when we heard from Seymour Hersh that Cheney caballed with his advisors on how to manufacture a causus belli to go to war with Iran, a discussion that included false flag operations on Americans, it's not too hard to imagine that the government might have been involved in the anthrax attacks or at least used them to drum up fear of Saddam and war with Iraq which was a predetermined policy as we know from many administration insiders.

So here I go. We know Cheney and other neo-cons misused intelligence to bring us war in Iraq. More Americans have now died in that conflict than died in the 9/11 attacks. We know that Cheney feels comfortable seriously discussing false flag operations that lead to the death of Americans. We know that someone (probably Cheney) sent high-level members of the administration (Rove, Libby) to disclose the identity of a CIA agent as a political measure. We know that several high level administration sources lied to Brian Ross about an Iraq/Anthrax connection. We know Cheney selectively declassified intelligence briefings to bolster his political agenda. In short, we know as fact that this administration is familiar with how to use national security prerogatives and concerns for political ends. We know that they have distorted out national security apparatus to achieve their political goals. And we know that, at least in some cases, they have put their political interests ahead of national security.

We know that there are many questions unresolved about what happened on 9/11 and intelligence lapses that led up to it. We know that the 9/11 commission was heavily managed by Executive Director Philip Zelikow a long time colleague of Condoleeza Rice and one of the architects of the Global War on Terror. Many investigative staffers on the commission believe that Zelikow obstructed the investigation in a politically motivated way and conferred with Karl Rove during the investigation. We know that Bush and Cheney insisted that they testify together in a time limited interview that was not under oath.

So given all of this why is questioning the official version of 9/11 such a taboo? I have conversations all the time with other well informed people who are outraged with the abuses of power in the Bush Administration but whenever I bring up 9/11 I get a blank stare, uncomfortable silence, and a sense that I've gone over the line.

I am not a tin foil hat kind of person but it just doesn't seem that big a stretch to go from things we know the Bush Administration has done in self serving manipulation of all of the major facets of government to suspect that they saw a terrorist attack on America as a political boon and either allowed it to happen or actively participated in it.

To me this is the most important area to investigate of Bush era scandals because all of the others flow from the immense amount of power granted Bush because of the War on Terror.

Let's take a look at the orginal intended victims of the anthrax attack. Liberal senators and major media outlets. Given the amount of anthrax used and delivery mechanism, whoever sent it must have known the limited amount of harm and death that would result. The intent was not massive civilian casaulties. But sure appears to be alot of cipro passed out.

And then the attacks happen, and how gratiful those in the media who got the cipro must to their government sources. In short order reporters and media become compliant as their physical safety is dependent on the government. And there is another message here: "behave or we will let this happen, or yah, even make it happen." Good luck getting many in the media to open up for just the implicit fear generated by the attacks.

I used to not believe in conspiracy theories because the more people know, the more liklihood there will be an information leak. But now, so what, now all you have to do is threaten those who may listen and publish.

There's a big difference between 1946 and 1963. Has anyone seen the picture of Duley in the Frederick paper? There should be a physical difference between someone who's in her forties and someone in her sixties.

A thought: Intelligence agencies often use the same identities for different people, thus contradictions in history.

Or more simply: Maybe the person who filled out the restraining order is a different person than the one who got the DUIs.

More questions without answers.

Given the weekend's glorification of her as a psychological/psychiatric professional, I was surprised to learn she has only a bachelors and must conduct any counseling she does "under supervision."

As a result, Duley is not eligible for membership in the APA (requires doctorate) and not eligible even for Associate membership (requires masters). She would only be eligible for a Student membership.

I don't think it is accurate to call her a professional if she does not qualify for Full or Associate membership in the professional society for her discipline.

From a post at Democratic Underground:

So Duley worked at the Comprehensive Counseling Associates. She's a Bachelor of Social Work and CSC - AD. Here is what her credentialing means in the state of Maryland:

Certified Supervised Counselor-Alcohol and Drug (CSC-AD):

http://www.ceattc.org/md_certification.asp#CSC-AD

- At least 18 years of age

- Associates degree in Health or Human Services counseling field or completed a program of studies judged by the Board to be substantially equivalent in subject matter and extent of training

- 15 credits, including a minimum 1 credit Ethics in A&D counseling course

- 2 years, 2,000 hours. 1 year must be after the award of the degree

- MACCB/ICRC-AODA exam

- Practice under the supervision of a CPC-AD or other supervisor approved by the Board AND while an employee of a JCAHO or Maryland State accredited program