B.

Keith Olbermann had a guest on yesterday who claimed that the woman who had requested the restraining order on Ivins had a history of dui and run ins with the law. She mispelt her occupation, therapist, on the form--she was actually a social worker and the facilitator of a support group in which Ivins was involved, not a mental health professional. I can't remember the guy's name, and I wasn't able to google the show today...anyone know who this guy was, and his record? To be honest, he looked a little over botoxed and collagen injected, but I don't want to judge simply by appearance.

On another note, I would like to add another dimension of the media leak problem. It is also possible that the leaks--released for good or ill, info or disinfo--are themselves spun by media to generate more sensation and create hot front page stories. There is nothing like a revelation--of the kind that GG punctured in his article today concerning the sorority--to get people reading the paper and looking at websites who would nto ordinarily care at all. Even in a perfect world, where government sources leaked only relevant and iron-clad tid bits for the good of society at large, media would still be trying to squeeze the most sex, violence and creepiness out of them for the simple goal of profit.

Finally, Ivins is perhaps the best poster child for why government surveillance is so dangerous. Heaven forbid a government intelligence agency get (that is assuming they have not yet 'got') my internet search info--or for that matter, the search record of just about any person over the age of 12. The headlines they could make out of my private life with the right wording would make Ivins' look pretty tame.

Everybody is now saying "uses pornography". I guess people don't look at it anymore, they "use" it, like a drug. That's strictly a right-wing religious meme, probably based on some twisted surveys or "studies".

Yucch, nobody looks at or reads porn (that that age me or what?) they "use" it. And then presumably, wipe it off and put it away for the next "use".

Just a little persiflage on the fly here, not really germane, yes. Forget I said it.

Pleased although not surprised to hear about excellent FBI agents. I know there has to be someone doing competent work* or the FBI would not have any successes. Hillerman occasionally mentions agents who are savvy and helpful. And the FBI did get it right on torture interrogations at Guantanamo

Unfortunately the anthrax investigation seems to have brought out all the worst that a bureaucratic organization can do. One has to wonder why.

* Although I admit that the revelations about the FBI Crime Lab a few years ago really shook my confidence.

they just kept jamming factoids under the various headings until they managed to make the glass slipper "fit" -- sort of -- if you squint and stand far enough back.

Profiling is just a form of "scientific" prejudice that's supposed to, as I recall it, HELP focus investigations ... not to LEAD or determine them.

Yes, we should all feel a shiver of fear watching the extraneous personal bullshit that has been piecemealed out to the media regarding Mr. Ivins ... absolutely shameful behavior... and reckless ... yes, let's all remember Richard Jewell for a moment ... and Eric Rudolph ...

The appalling and unprofessional manner in which the FBI is dribbling out bits of information to the press in this matter throws into stark relief the words of Justice Robert H. Jackson in his address on the federal prosecutor given in 1940 as highlighted by Bruce Fein's column in today's Washington Times:

The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated and, if he is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations. Or the prosecutor may choose a more subtle course and simply have a citizen's friends interviewed. The prosecutor can order arrests, present cases to the grand jury in secret session, and on the basis of his one-sided presentation of the facts, can cause the citizen to be indicted and held for trial. He may dismiss the case before trial, in which case the defense never has a chance to be heard. ... While the prosecutor at his best is one of the most beneficent forces in our society, when he acts from malice or other base motives, he is one of the worst.

Given the staggering disconnect between the 2001-2002 narrative of Iraq as the source of the anthrax and the current one of the late Bruce Ivins as the source of the anthrax, it is absolutely essential that, to the extent genuinely possible, the evidence be publicly laid out. The evidence may show Ivins to be guilty or it may demonstrate the FBI's investigation as the sort of shoddy work product one can expect from a Justice Department that has been retooled into a political arm of the White House.

For trying to pass off the following drivel. Next they'll probably report that Ivins was seen in a 7-11 buying envelopes!

I laughed when I read this, then I cried. What a pathetic country we've become. The AP's said:

The top suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks was obsessed with a sorority that sat less than 100 yards away from a New Jersey mailbox where the toxin-laced letters were sent, authorities said today. . . .

The bizarre link to the sorority may indirectly explain one of the biggest mysteries in the case: why the anthrax was mailed from Princeton, 195 miles from the Army biological weapons lab the anthrax is believed to have been smuggled out of.

Obvious question...

We now know that some of the anthrax letters contained a novel, highly-weaponized form of anthrax that originated from a US military laboratory. Ask yourself this question. What's more likely?

I'll let others more versed in this correct me if I'm wrong but there is some confusion about "weaponized" and "lethality" with respect to the anthrax used in this case. Unless I am mistaken - due to the terrible job the press has done and what seems to be a concerted effort by some quarters to leak bad information into the mix - this anthrax was not "weaponized" but was highly lethal, although it appears it's lethality increased from the first letters to the last.