Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

LATE UPDATE: Since the following item was posted, we have seen a drastic change in the behavior of email filtering for both Comcast and users of other email services. We do not know what was causing the problem, or why the symptoms have disappeared. We may be forgiven, I suppose, if we suspect the rapid change of status had something to do with the amount of noise generated over this issue. Thanks to you, the blogosphere is working. And we will post further updates if and when we learn more. Thanks again to all who have contributed to the effort.

We no longer need readers to perform the tests described below. But if you wish to do them for your own interest, we have no desire to stop you

UPDATE: After the following speculative item was somewhat tentatively posted, we have been able to confirm reports of emails being blocked by other ISPs as well as Comcast. We'll post more when we know more. In the meantime, please try the tests described below, regardless of your e-mail provider, so we can get some sense of the scope of the problem. Thank you very much, as always.

Five weeks ago The BRAD BLOG ran a report indicating that Comcast, the nation's most popular email provider, was automatically deleting emails containing the web address "www.afterdowningstreet.org". Shortly after the report was published, 6 or 7 people made such a commotion that the problem was suddenly fixed. Various explanations were given, none of which cut any ice in the opinion of this lowly and nearly frozen blogger, but at least the problem went away.

Why am I telling you this? Background info. Today we have received a report indicating that something similar is happening again, but this time the address that triggers Comcast's automatic deletion is "www.meetwithcindy.org".

Personally, I do not have Comcast service, nor do I know anyone who does. So I cannot test this report for myself. I can ask for a bit of help, though. If you are a Comcast subscriber, please help us out by doing the following simple test.

Are you with me so far? I want you to send yourself four emails and tell me how many actually arrive. The four emails will be very simple, as described below:

• one with "www.meetwithcindy.org" in the subject line, and the words "test #1" in the body
• one with "meetwithcindy.org" in the subject line, and the words "test #2" in the body
• one with "www.meetwithcindy.org" in the body, and the words "test #3" in the subject line
• one with "meetwithcindy.org" in the body, and the words "test #4" in the subject line

Send these messages, wait a little while, then check for incoming messages and find out for yourself. According to our source, you will receive "test #4" but not "test #3". Apparently the "www." prefix is necessary to trigger the automatic deletion. If this makes no sense to you, please recall that in the previous episode, the address in question, "afterdowningstreet.org", triggered the automatic deletion only if it carried this prefix. In other words, emails containing "afterdowningstreet.org" passed through cleanly, while those containing "www.afterdowningstreet.org" were dispatched to the nearest black hole.

Most of the time the prefix "www." is insignificant; but apparently the prefix is very important in this case. But we don't know for sure, and that's why we're asking you to do some testing.

We don't know what to expect regarding tests #1 and #2. That's why we're asking you to perform them. After we collect more information, we can take it to Comcast and request a correction in their software --- or in their censorship policy, as the case may be. The more information we can present, the better it will be --- not only for us, but also for the people at Comcast (or Symantec) who will have to solve the problem.

I emphasize that this is not the time to make a lot of noise --- not publicly, at least. This is the time for gathering data. We can make noise soon enough, if we can confirm the report we received earlier today.

UPDATE: Go ahead and make some noise if you like. We've seen enough to know that something terribly fishy is going on.

CONTACT INFO for COMCAST:
Abuse Dept: phone 856-317-7272 – ext 1 or email: Secure-port25@comcast.net
Mike: phone 856-324-2415 or email abuse_99@comcast.net or email abuse99@gmail.com
Jim Janco [Manager of abuse dept]: cell 856-297-3548

We will post more contact information as soon as possible.

If you're still not sure about your e-mail provider, or if you'd like to help us gather more data, please participate in our informal study. I'll be watching this thread to see the results of your testing.

To repeat: Please send yourself four emails as described above, then come here and tell us how many --- and which ones --- you received.

Thanks, as usual, for your cooperation.

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

This thread is intended as a place to talk about vigils in your area, your plans for this evening, and any de-briefing you may feel like contributing afterwards.

Please don't go OT on this thread. There's an open thread immediately below for everything else.

This might be a good place to remind you that tonight's gatherings will be ideal places to spread the word about The Whispering Campaign ... And please bring a few pages with you. Or, better yet, stop by Kinko's along the way, and bring a whole stack of them!

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

There's a half-open thread just above, for discussion of tonight's vigils. You can talk about anything else here.

And you might as well...

All three guest-bloggers may be tied up at the same time today and/or tonight, but we'll be with you again as soon as possible.

Cheers to all!

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Click here or on the photo for the latest!

Thanks again, Larisa!!

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

I don't usually talk about my dreams, much less write about them. They're usually so unintelligible they don't even interest me. But last night I had a dream that seemed very clear.

In my dream, I called CNN and said "When are you going to interrupt your normal programming to cover tomorrow's terrorist attacks?" ... and the voice said "9:30" ... and I said "that's 9:30 Eastern, right? Tomorrow morning?" ... and the voice said "That's right, sir. 9:30 A.M. Eastern time tomorrow."

The last time I checked the TV, it was nearly noon eastern time, and CNN was still talking about Cindy Sheehan and the price of oil ... and something about an actress ... and something about an athlete. This is good. We need them to keep talking about stuff like this all day.

My, how times have changed! Just a few months ago I was pointing out, derisively, the amount of attention CNN was giving to the trial of a former pop singer. Today I'd be happy if they talked about that trial all day, just as long as they don't interrupt their normal programming for live coverage of the terrorist attacks, and the new nuclear war.

What's that, you say? Have I lost my mind? Well maybe I have, but that has nothing to do with this.

In case you haven't noticed, the internet has been abuzz lately with talk of impending terror attacks against the USA, on a scale heretofore unimaginable; such attacks to trigger the imposition of martial law at home and a full-scale, conventional and nuclear, attack on Iran. And according to some sources, the attack was supposed to come --- if it did come --- today.

After that dream, I couldn't very well sleep, and I've been checking the TV regularly --- something I never do --- just to see what CNN is doing. Everything seems absolutely normal. So I'm starting to believe that one of the following things may be true:

• The dream was wrong. Hey, sue me! It happens to everybody.
• The whole story was a hoax. There were no "distracting" war games on 9/11. There was no terror-response drill going on in London on 7/7. All the stories about Operation Northwoods were hoaxes too. Move along, folks. There's nothing to see here.
• They've changed the date and/or the time of the attack, and we are still in grave danger. What's the probability of this one? I wouldn't hazard a guess.
• They know we know, and it's holding them at bay. How likely is this? I can't estimate it; can't see it clearly. I have a conflict of interest: I want to live a long and happy life, and I want the same for my kids.

That's why I'm whispering. And it seems to me that maybe 6 or 7 other people are whispering along with me. And maybe ... just maybe ... if we whisper loud enough, we can keep the terrorists from striking again. Maybe.

LAST MINUTE UPDATE: The kids are home now, and I don't have access to the TV. That's all right with me, as long as the internet connection is working. And I can see from CNN's home page that everything is still normal; there's fresh carnage in Baghdad but none here. Oh yawn!

And by the way, who will be the next James Bond?

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

According to this story from the Star Tribune:

Star Tribune writers Dane Smith and Greg Gordon make the de rigeur attempt at balance, and inadvertently throw a bright light on the sleaze-mongers and spin-meisters who support this war and the chickenhawks who started it.

Honestly, I don't understand why the opinions of "a Republican state leader" are necessary to the telling of this essentially news story. But then again how would we know what a crass hypocrite he is unless we hear his "side" of the "story"?

Which, not surprisingly, goes like this:

I don't imagine we should expect Walsh to explain why he doesn't "think you should question the president's motives", which to all indications are highly questionable, if not outright criminal, and in my opinion Walsh would have a very difficult time proving that Bush is "fully aware of the ramifications of sending people's children into battle". Maybe Walsh is clairvoyant. But according to all the signs we ordinary humans can see, Bush is entirely unaware of said ramifications.

Still less do I understand what difference it makes if a pro-war politician accuses an anti-war politician of having "a political agenda". Do the pro-war "people" not have an agenda of their own? And is it not political?

I have always had a problem with people who pluralize the names of individuals and organizations, as if to imply that there are many of them. Who are all the other "Michael Moores" and why haven't we heard of them? Where are all the other "MoveOn.orgs" and how do they differ from the original? You won't find any answers to questions like these in the remainder of the article, but you can click on the photo to read the rest of it anyway.

But please be careful. The pro-war spin is enough to make you dizzy, especially early in the morning.

On the other hand, you can do your part to resist the media spin by clicking here and taking some unspun truths to the streets. Being The Media has never been easier, or more fun. Which is a damned good thing because it has never been more necessary, either.

Knowledge Is Power! Pass It On!!

And many thanks to regular BRAD BLOG commenter, Valley Girl, for the pointer to this article among other things. Keep up the good work, VG. You're fascinating!

UPDATE: The Star Tribune article I've been quoting, which was freely available just a few minutes ago, now seems to be available via registration only. I hate when that happens.

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

I wouldn't want you to miss this excellent new column by Tom Engelhardt. I'll even give you a few excerpts to get you started:

Please read more.

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Click the photo for the rest of the article. And thanks again to Larisa, who has been very busy today!

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Click the photo for the rest of the article. And thanks to Larisa for the good news!

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Doug Thompson, writing for Capitol Blue, asks: Is Bush Out of Control? His answer? Heavily edited excerpts follow.

Do I think the President is losing it? No. I think he lost it a long time ago. However, the entire piece is worth a read: not too long and very well-written. Thompson quotes a prominent psychiatrist calling Bush an untreated former alcoholic. Take a look at the photo [of Bush with Dennis Hastert] and decide for yourself whether the word "former" seems appropriate. Click on the photo if you're not sure. And please share your thoughts below.

Thanks to Peg C. for many things, including the pointer to this article.

You seein' everything OK, Georgie? Georgie?? GEORGIE???

If you've enjoyed this post, please Buy Something at The BRAD STORE and/or Make a Donation via Credit Card or PayPal and/or Send a Donation via Snail Mail. Thanks to you, The BRAD BLOG and The BRAD SHOW are still here, and still growing!!

Guest blogged by Joseph Cannon

Go to Google, type in the words Schwarzenegger, Gigi and impeach --- and what comes up? Precious little. Yet at this very moment, we should be seeing the stirring of a widespread impeachment movement.

The California governor had a seven-year affair with Gigi Goyette, who now lives in Malibu. The affair may have started when she was underaged.

The story was first told in LA Magazine back in September of 2004. Alas, everyone (including this writer) ignored the matter until the L.A. Times brought it back into focus.

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Some of us have read the newest Harpers, notable for its excerpt from Mark Crispin Miller's None Dare Call It Stolen. And many of us have been waiting for it to hit the net.

from None Dare Call It Stolen, by Mark Crispin Miller:

... or not ... you may have been expecting it ... once burnt, twice shy, as they say ...

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

BRAD BLOG reader and commenter "WTF" pointed out an article [and photos] from the Lexington Herald-Leader. We found the following passages notable, especially given their source.

It irritates us too, Geraldine. No small amount, indeed!

Our heartfelt condolences, and sincerest best wishes, to the family and friends of the late Chase Johnson Comley, and to all the other families and friends who weep today.

Click here or on the photo for more. Thanks to the Lexington Herald-Leader.

Or maybe it depends on whay you mean by "is" ...

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

Here's a chilling story from Salt Lake City, which one of our friends noticed at The Salt Lake Tribune. It's the kind of tale that Brad eats for breakfast, but for me it's the sort of thing I gag on.

I don't mean "gag" in the way you might think, that the overwhelming nature of the sleaze takes away my appetite. Instead, I mean: Brad would be able to understand all this --- and explain it to you --- a lot better than I can. But he's away --- the slacker! --- and so it falls to this lowly and nearly frozen blogger...

I've read the article, Lobbyist challenged on voting machines: Legal. But ethical? S.L. County's lobbying firm also works for the devices' manufacturer, several times, and the words of Derek P. Jensen are finally starting to seep into my very thick skull. I'm even starting to get a handle on the cast of characters! Listen:

Peter Corroon is the Mayor of Salt Lake County.

Blaze Wharton, Dan Hartman and Paul Rogers are principals in The Tetris Group, a lobbying firm which is paid to lobby for the Salt Lake County Mayor's Office.

The Tetris Group also has other clients, one of whom just happens to be Diebold Election Systems, a manufacturer of touch-screen voting machines, on which The BRAD BLOG has reported many times --- often in less than glowing terms.

Last month, as part of their bid for the lucrative statewide election machine contract, Diebold made a presentation at the Salt Lake County Government Center. They were escorted to this presentation by their lobbyists --- the Tetris team --- who also just happen to work for the county Mayor's Office. One slight problem: the Mayor's Office never asked Tetris to do this for to them.

Peter Corroon: "We never asked Tetris to go out and lobby the state to get the Diebold systems. They came in with Diebold..."

As regular readers of this space already know [all too well], Diebold's machines are crap not always reliable, and as Jensen writes, Salt Lake County "leaders continue to unleash a litany of complaints."

For their part, Tetris has set up what apears to be a classic runaround: Wharton is referring all questions to Hartman, who isn't returning any phone calls. And Rogers cannot even be reached. So that end of the trail is set up just about the way we'd expect it.

Gavin Anderson is Deputy District Attorney of Salt Lake County and he says the push "to determine an economic conflict must come from the mayor's office", according to Jensen, who quotes Anderson as saying:

Maybe I'm nearly frozen but I'm still functional enough to realize that this sounds like a good idea!! Is there anybody home over at the Mayor's Office?

And what does Diebold say? According to Jensen:

Wow! That's mighty reassuring, is it not?

Well ... don't take my word for it. I'm too cold to make any sense anyway. You should read Derek P. Jensen's Lobbyist challenged on voting machines and enjoy the full reassuring story in its original context.

Thanks, as always. I'll be back. But I gotta go try and thaw out for a while. Brrrr! What a cold story!

P.S. I heard from Brad last night, albeit briefly. He is doing fine, getting some R&R, and heading back to the wild lands. He sends you his best regards. He also says "Watch for some heavy Cannon Fire, coming to a blog near you, on Monday".

I can't imagine what he means. But we shall see...