Thank you so much for your informative post and for sharing your personal struggles. I'm working on a psychological post but I don't think any amount of data analysis and parsing I could do would capture so clearly the essence of the problems here. Folks who haven't experienced such symptoms (or perhaps would be loathe to identify with Ivins) have a tendency to over-interpret and even demonize. You've made a very valuable contribution to this discussion.

If anything, those posts make him sound far more rational than other public pronouncements that had emerged. If posting under many psuedonymous alias is an indicator of bioterror tendencies, then LWM should be the FBI's primary suspect ;>

-- omooex

I'm on all the best no fly lists.

:-)

My mother and sister used to think I was the unabomber. Which just goes to show how little your own family might know about you. I was hardly a Luddite then. I owned computers and all the latest gadgets. Now I refuse to even own a cell phone. But I did fool the feds once again!

Keep in mind: the 9/11 anthrax attack letters (and the attacks themselves) were designed to ignite a holy war between America and Israel on one side and Islam on the other. Religious and ideological elements are absolutely central to this case.

What we've got so far on Ivins:

anti: abortion rights, civil liberties, Islam

pro: "Christian Nation Express", "conservative Christians", "evangelical Christians", Christian nationalism, Christian Zionism, Jews as chosen people, Judaism, Patriot Act, Roman Catholicism

quote: "Osama Bin Laden has just decreed death to all Jews and all Americans."

quote: "You can get on board or get left behind, because that Christian Nation Express is pulling out of the station!"

quote: "By blood and faith, Jews are God's chosen, and have no need for 'dialogue' with any gentile."

Have I missed anything?

I'm on all the best no fly lists.

Under how many names? ;')

You wrote:

"My initial thougts are that you are a conservative hack trying to make this site look like a conspiracy minded nutfest. The letter you linked to mentioned the word CONSPIRACY in all caps within the first paragraph, the website of the poster in question is for a "natural healer" and "prophet", who seems like a really big kook (there is a photo of him holding an owl on his arm). This is your first and only posting herein. You may in fact be the poster in question.

So. If I were readers here, I would ignore your post."

What you did get right from the aforementioned was that this was my "first and only" post. Thank you for the warm welcome.

I can assure you, I'm neither a conservative, a hack, or a conspirator advancing an agenda. Just an interested party who did a cursory, and admittedly, rushed read and discovered what I thought to be interesting data. In truth, I favored the second poster cited, a self-described biochemistry professor(identified as h_nicole_young @http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-08-06-anthrax-investigation_N.htm) who had taken considerable time in digesting and evaluating the released FBI documents. Despite your suggestion that no one honor my earlier post, I feel her efforts should not be dismissed or overlooked based on your inaccuracies concerning me and my motives.

Perhaps the selection you mention was somewhat extreme, but hardly in violation of the myriad number of sensibilities evidenced on this or any other site. Again, it was a "cursory" read, which I properly qualified in closing: "While I can't attest to the veracity of these people or these posts, they raise some interesting and compelling information that may prove valuable."

It's interesting that your impressions of me, as well as the first poster you describe as the "really big kook," are not too dissimilar from what the FBI is circulating regarding the unfortunately misunderstood and regretably deceased Dr. Ivins. A little humanity please. None of us is so clearly or indelibly drawn.

I didn't mean any disrespect if you were legit, but I can see why it came off as rude and I apologize. I think its very important before you link to something that you check out its veracity and the qualifications of the source. Its very easy to make something a fact, simply by referring to it and getting other people talking about it. Soon it enters the discourse as an established given. That happened a couple of times here, I noticed, where people did not adequately parse their sources, through no intent of malice.

So. Sorry, about your reception, I am by no means the arbiter of posts here anyway, and am just one person, so don't let it prevent you from posting in the future. If you read my comment, I was basically saying, given the fact that your link was so wacky, I could only assume that you were a disinformer and I was warning others. You might be able to see why I or anyone would have thought that, and take it as a reason to be a little more confident in your sources.

...I'd love to know what was in Ivin's letters. Perhaps using an assumed name was his way of being able to criticize without placing his career in jeopardy. For instance, a lot of people on the internet use assumed names to write critical commentary that might jeopardize their jobs if they were to use their own names.

Don't know why this point hasn't been raised before. Can apply to folks in any field but for those of us who've been in federal service, it's an especially important consideration. There are even some restrictions on political activity for federal employees. For a seemingly cautious man like Ivins, imagine this would hold in spades.

Under how many names? ;')

-- Jim White

Let's just say that in a previous life, prior to 2001, I used to engage in all sorts of chicanery, trickery and other ethically challenged methods to obtain confidential and normally inaccessible information, up to and including using manipulated and forged documentation of a less than official nature. Press passes, business cards, company ID's. I never really needed a fake drivers license to by liquor as a teenager. To be honest, little confidence tricks tricks you could pick up by watching the Rockford Files, for instance. OTOH, without going into too much detail, all of your personal information is much safer today because of weaknesses and exploits I found in the help desk phone services at telephone, cable TV companies and other utility providers you do business with over the phone everyday. The passwords and last 4 digits of the social security number you are harassed with today are a result of that. Sorry! It is for your own protection! But you'd be shocked at how easy it still is to get confidential records over the phone if you know the tricks. There was a time when those boneheads used to verify your identy by asking questions like: And you live at 123, Imadummy St. Apt. 12? That kind of stupidity and sloppiness can get a person killed, say a woman hiding out from a deranged and abusive boyfriend, (or vice versa!). So don't think too harshly of me. I was doing legitimate work in some ethically questionable and possibly illegitimate way but the end result was most of our personal info is breached in bulk by hackers or massive incompetence.