Here's a letter from the March 25, 1995 Baltimore Sun:

MARCIA CLARK'S CHILDREN

I was dismayed at Susan Reimer's paean to Marcia Clark in The Sun on March 5. (Marcia Clark is, of course, the brilliant prosecuting attorney in the O. J. Simpson case whose present to her husband on Christmas in 1993 was to tell him, "You aren't intellectually stimulating enough for me. Get out!")

Ms. Reimer conveniently ignores three cogent facts in her argument that Marcia Clark deserves exclusive custody of her children (as well as increased child support):

(1) It was the decision of Marcia Clark, not her husband, to destroy their family and end the marriage;

(2) During the marriage her husband equally shared parenting responsibilities with his wife; and

(3) Mr. Clark is able to give the children far more time as a parent than is his wife.

Ms. Reimer needs to advance beyond the faulty premise that children are pieces of property belonging exclusively to the mother.

Perhaps then she will realize that maybe, just maybe, it is better for children to have a few hours a day of devoted attention from their father, rather than a few hectic minutes of their mother's time.

Bruce E. Ivins
Frederick

Here he is in the May 12, 1991 Washington Post:

What Richard Cohen refuses to admit is that Douglas Hann's real sin was not that he was a non-gentleman, but rather that he was a politically incorrect non-gentleman [Critic at Large, March 17]. Had Hann screamed something anti-Catholic, anti-white or anti-male, he would still be a student -- a politically correct student -- at Brown University. BRUCE E. IVINS Frederick, Md.

The next question: Crazed lunatic acting alone? Who else was in on this?

It was clear very early on that for the highly weaponized varieties (the white powdery sort, not the brown clumpy stuff found in some locations), could only have an origin in a very small number of places. By late 2002, it had come out that the anthrax in question had been weaponized according to a US technique (as opposed to a Soviet one) and was of an American strain. This strongly pointed to an origin within the US biological weapons community, and the terror technique (limited dispersal to political targets with letters warning to seek treatment) to me strongly pointed to a researcher using a murderous means of increasing his funding.

So I don't think anyone is really surprised by this development. I for one am not convinced the bungler's in the FBI really have anything or that this particular guy did it. It's a bit to convienent.

As for Jack Bog's question, the number of people in out it would have to be very small in order to successfully pull off a conspiracy. For that reason, I'm thinking one is the most likely number, with two being the next most likely and anything more than three very unlikely indeed.

It is a lot to read, but I'm struck with how many people these days are hounded to death by the current government, whether it is uncovering screw ups or providing some one to screw.

"...(Testing) strongly pointed to an origin within the US biological weapons community ...."

No. DNA matching (anthrax is a living organism, remember) IDENTIFIED exactly ONE source: Ivins's place, exactly and incontrovertibly. Also, there is no "b.w. community;" there is one place, and only the workers in that place, and under one managing director -- in the WHOLE WORLD. Aiming to incite public fear, not aiming (vendetta?) at a specific individual (because the method can NOT control its victim selection), the murderer(s) is among those workers. And we don't know which one(s), so discipline them all: 'Downsize' everybody out the door, and SHUT THE PLACE.

The anthrax stuff, and the very idea of culturing stockpiles of disease and germs and death gasses, has and does NO GOOD whatsoever and is ONLY asking for trouble and CAUSING BAD.

"... people these days are hounded to death by the current government ...."

GOV'T does not hound people -- PERSONS hound people. And persons don't (only) "hound people to death" -- sometimes they point-blank exactly murder them, dead. (Such as JFK.) Premeditated. With malice aforethought. Struggling with personal powerLUST ... same as 'capitalists' struggling with personal moneyLUST sometimes murder people; same as sex fiends struggling with personal gusto LUST.

Democracy is your public tax-funded government.

Authoritarian tyranny is your public tax-funded government high on 'TOP' SECRECY.

Glenn Greenwald has an extensive post on this today and it's an eye-opener. Here's a link:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

I won't try to summarize here, but there's an awful stench coming out of this. ABC News keeps repeating the false "Bentonite" information that they were fed by someone in the government. (The Bentonite is a smoking gun to Saddam Hussein.) Several columnists are advised by "government officials" to start taking Cipro before the attacks begin. John McCain and Joe Lieberman are publicly linking this to Iraq days after it happens, when no real information is available. Read the post in its entirety.

Mike Austin: Thank you for the Greenwald link.

What Greenwald has written is the dagger in the heart of the matter: ABC TV / WSJ / NEO-con MSM are LIARS, the same guilt as infecting a rabid dead dog in the drinking well of audience information.