Keith Olbermann receives phoney anthrax letter.

September 27, 2006 10:27 PM

Keith Olbermann receives phoney anthrax letter. "The New York Post may have just impeded an FBI investigation into terroristic threats." Why send anthrax to the media? (real or otherwise)
posted by augustweed (52 comments total)

Our nightly Olbermann post!
posted by jonson at 10:34 PM on September 27, 2006

I would be interested to know how many fake anthrax letters are received every day in the US. I heard from someone who works in the NZ company that investigates this stuff that there are still about 3 fake letters throughout the country on average a month, but it is no longer publicised as that just leads to more letters.
posted by scodger at 10:46 PM on September 27, 2006

Is that Worst Person In The World thing a regular bit? Maybe I should watch more TV!
posted by aubilenon at 10:49 PM on September 27, 2006

I've just recently found out Olbermann exists (no MSNBC here, at least not on the non-premium cable channels), and watched a number of YouTube videos of his yesterday and today.

He's awesome. And I can definitely see how nutbar supporters of the current administration would want to send him threats.
posted by Kickstart70 at 10:53 PM on September 27, 2006

The reasoning in the second link reminded me of something written by L Ron Hubbard, that the roads around DC are so confusing is no accident. He wrote that they were planned that way to stymie any citizen from visiting their representative.

[The anthrax attacks] effectively cut off the public from Congress. Only those people able who could get through the switchboards would have had any voice at all.

That happened long before the anthrax attack, and perhaps even before there was such a thing as a switchboard.
posted by peeedro at 10:57 PM on September 27, 2006

I haven't watched the clip, but if this is the same piece that aired tonight, here is the NYPost piece he was talking about: POWDER PUFF SPOOKS KEITH. Disgusting.
posted by bob sarabia at 11:27 PM on September 27, 2006

Yeah, I did think the posts article "making fun" of olbermann was pretty odd. I mean, are they seriously saying that he shouldn't have called the police? WTF? Especially since the Post was a recipient of the original anthrax letters.
posted by delmoi at 11:29 PM on September 27, 2006

Yup, same piece. This shouldn't be surprising to anyone. Coulter, Malkin and co have called for the death of the terrorist supporting liberals, so it's no surprise their listeners send death threats/fake anthrax to the wingnut, unhinged libs.
posted by bob sarabia at 11:33 PM on September 27, 2006

C&L has lots of Olbermann.
posted by homunculus at 11:35 PM on September 27, 2006

You know what's really funny? That he so carefully refuted the NY Post. It's the NY Post! In the PageSix section, for crying out loud. Nothing more needs to be said.
posted by sbutler at 11:38 PM on September 27, 2006

He was trying to "rise above the fray", as they say.
posted by bob sarabia at 11:43 PM on September 27, 2006

That NYT article is great, because it shows that the conservative fuckwads in the US are actually running scared of him.

To run that kind of bullshit, ultra-biased commentary against a man who is doing nothing more than speaking his mind about the fucked up policies and totally batshitinsane decisions of what is almost certainly the worst administration in US history, all in a pathetic attempt to try and discredit his growing influence, speaks more words than the child-like scrawlings of a cowardly, anonymous NYT contributer ever could.
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:44 PM on September 27, 2006

*New York Post, I mean.
posted by Effigy2000 at 11:44 PM on September 27, 2006

Here's the post about Fox v Clinton and here's the video.
posted by bob sarabia at 11:47 PM on September 27, 2006

Coulter, Malkin and co have called for the death of the terrorist supporting liberals, so it's no surprise their listeners send death threats/fake anthrax to the wingnut, unhinged libs.

I read a claim today, but did not verify, that Coulter has said she's sent fake anthrax as a "prank." Oh, what a wit, that gal.

If she did, I do have to wonder why she wasn't punished.
posted by five fresh fish at 12:33 AM on September 28, 2006

Is anyone surprised that right wing fucktards would choose the cowardly method of using the mail in this and the post 9-11 attacks?
posted by 2sheets at 12:35 AM on September 28, 2006

Is this about Olbermann or the election?

If I were trying to ramp up fear (and had no sense of ethics), I would send scares to notable lefties, also, so that they could do the fear mongering for me.
posted by dreamsign at 1:04 AM on September 28, 2006

You know what's really funny?
For English-speakers outside the US, what's really, really, REALLY funny is that he actually used the word "terroristic".
posted by bunglin jones at 2:47 AM on September 28, 2006

I read a claim today, but did not verify, that Coulter has said she's sent fake anthrax as a "prank." Oh, what a wit, that gal.

That she did. It's pretty clear from the context that she was joking, I think, but it's still a reprehensible thing to say.
posted by EarBucket at 2:47 AM on September 28, 2006

Her career is nothing but a string of reprehensible utterances which are then applauded by her reprehinsible audience.
posted by caddis at 4:08 AM on September 28, 2006

Sorry for the derail, but this is really bugging me: Has Olberman corrected/apologized for his insult to Tokyo Rose in that Fox/Clinton rant he did Monday night?
posted by mediareport at 5:11 AM on September 28, 2006

Ann Coulter is awful, but she's just one person. What astounds me is that there can be an entire company, such as the New York Post, that is seemingly comprised of nothing but terrible people. It's of course disappointing that such people exist, but it blows me away that so many of them can work in the same office building.

The White House is one thing, since it pulls people of whatever ideological stripe from a pool of hundreds of millions to go to work in a place that is a springboard to a great craeer. But the people that work at the Post are likely not very well paid, not generally on a path to high powered jobs, are locally reared, but yet they continue to take part and/or contribute to the non-stop stream of filth that is the New York Post.
posted by psmealey at 5:19 AM on September 28, 2006

Of course, the NYP story is a terrible load of old bollocks, but am I only the only one who thinks that such a lengthy rebuttal smacks of self regard and that a more dignified approach might have been to either ignore it altogether or dismiss it a little more succinctly?
posted by rhymer at 5:28 AM on September 28, 2006

If this had been Brit Hume, we'd be on day four of the investigation by the press.

This is why we've lost. The GOP owns the president, the congress, the judiciary and the press.

Terror attacks against those who don't support the GOP are not only okay, they are funny.

Got a problem with that? Suck it. By next week, the President will merely declare you an enemy combatant and make you dissappear.
posted by eriko at 5:53 AM on September 28, 2006

The only excuse for buying the New York Post is that you have a birdcage that needs lining.
posted by clevershark at 6:06 AM on September 28, 2006

psmealey writes "Ann Coulter is awful, but she's just one person."

Discussion of Ann Coulter is about as à propos here as a thread on the latest ravings of Charles Manson or, really, any other deranged sociopath.
posted by clevershark at 6:08 AM on September 28, 2006

I agree, clevershark, I mentioned it in passing only because she was brought up earlier in the thread.
posted by psmealey at 6:11 AM on September 28, 2006

When I was growing up in NY you were basically considered retarded if you got your news from the NY Post. It was widely reported that you only needed a 4th grade level education to even read the Post. We NYers need to bring the shame of reading this rag back to life.
posted by any major dude at 6:16 AM on September 28, 2006

bunglin jones, I decided to look it up, but for good or bad "terroristic threats" is a term defined by law. I will admit it sounds craptacular, but it is endowed with a specific meaning.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:20 AM on September 28, 2006

Got a problem with that? Suck it. By next week, the President will merely declare you an enemy combatant and make you dissappear.

Got it, my man. Just wait 'til the next terrorist attack, and the full-scale criminalization of dissent begins.

In a just world, that NY Post reporter would herself get an envelope full of white powder.
posted by kgasmart at 6:26 AM on September 28, 2006

Here's an old interview with Richard Johnson (who wrote the article).

"Our approach toward gossip is more reporting, instead of just repeating gossip. We actually try to find out if it an item is true."

Pff. Good job on that one Sherlock. There are also mentions of past apologies. I wonder if he'll get around to an apology on this issue...
posted by Stauf at 6:47 AM on September 28, 2006

FWIW, Richard Johnson is the editor. The hack that wrote the story is Paula Froelich. You can e-mail her at [e-mail].
person
I urge everyone to let her know what a wonderful , compassionate human being she is.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 7:24 AM on September 28, 2006

wow...they have to melt your keys.
posted by destro at 7:58 AM on September 28, 2006

rhymer: That's Olbermann's big(gest?) weakness.

E&P on the Post's childishness. Does it surprise anyone that they did this despite having three of their own employees sickened by real anthrax?
posted by dhartung at 8:05 AM on September 28, 2006

I'm betting they threw them into the biohazzard box, which means off to a medical incinerator and, well, yeah, they and everything else in there is made into ash. I'd think you could ask nicely and they'd just autoclave them but what do I know.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 8:17 AM on September 28, 2006

Also ironic (and disgusting) is that the employer of the trollish dullard Jon Podhoretz and the super-shrill Andrea Peyser has no compunction about calling Olbermann a "loudmouth". I guess a person is only a "loudmouth" when you don't agree with him.
posted by psmealey at 8:22 AM on September 28, 2006

rhymer - i disagree ... the nypost and other conservative outlets are the first to scream about other papers and networks "endangering" americans by exposing leaks and other information, and not being quiet for the good of the government's "war on terror" ... and yet, they feel free to blab about an ongoing investigation of a possible domestic terrorist incident, not for the purpose of informing the american people, but to do a hatchet job on a media figure so he looks like a chickenshit

that's shameful and hypocritical

as a further contrast, i note that michelle "the new york times is helping the terrorists" malkin hasn't breathed a word about this on her web site yet

conclusion - it's not "traitorous" or "helping the terrorists" to blow the cover when it's liberals who have been targeted
posted by pyramid termite at 8:25 AM on September 28, 2006

Haha! THAT'LL show him to speak out against Bush! We're just going to scare him a little, to achieve a political goal. Maybe he'll think twice before badmouthing a real american again.

Psst. I heard it was George Allen
posted by hoborg at 8:45 AM on September 28, 2006

Psst. I heard it was George Allen

No way - Olbermann's white.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 8:51 AM on September 28, 2006 [1 favorite]

The Post's Richard Johnson, besides being a scumbag parasite, is also a drunk driver. Maybe we should post his home address and cell phone number too? Both, with some looking, can be found in the public domain.

Live by nasty gossip, then be hoist by it, asshole.
posted by fourcheesemac at 9:34 AM on September 28, 2006

From fourcheesemac's link:

Johnson, police sources said, smelled of alcohol, his speech was slurred and his eyes were bloodshot. He refused an alco-sensor test, but failed a coordination test and was charged with driving while intoxicated and driving while impaired.

His lawyer, Ed Hayes, said Johnson might have had one too many beers but he did pass some field sobriety tests police gave him. 'It was very unlikely he was drunk,' he said.

WTF? One too many beers, smelled of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes--but it's very unlikely he was drunk??
posted by leftcoastbob at 9:37 AM on September 28, 2006

The famous are different from you and I.

He's still a drunk driver by any normal standard. And that makes him a terrorist in real life.
posted by fourcheesemac at 9:39 AM on September 28, 2006

pyramid termite, I daresay you're right. I live in London where, although we have plenty of Murdoch papers, the media climate is very different.

That said, I still think when you make yourself the story like that (and do it in such a po-faced way) you risk becoming a parody of yourself.
posted by rhymer at 9:50 AM on September 28, 2006

mediareport: I've been wondering the same thing.
posted by brundlefly at 10:54 AM on September 28, 2006

Continuing the Tokyo Rose derail: Iva Toguri died on Tuesday. Mefi Tokyo Rose thread from last year.
posted by witchstone at 12:39 PM on September 28, 2006

Oops, didn't realize someone posted about her death yesterday. Nevermind!
posted by witchstone at 12:40 PM on September 28, 2006

brundlefly: Which Toyko Rose? But why not focus on this thread instead of bringing up a self-described "apology" derail? Wait, I see. That is how it works. When you can't respond you misdirect.

Good show.
posted by ?! at 8:16 PM on September 28, 2006

Whoa, whoa, I stayed out of the thread for a reason, but it wasn't because I "can't respond" to you, ?!. If you think Olberman (or his researchers) knew the full story about Tokyo Rose when they made the offhand reference that used her as a stand-in for evil propogandists, fine. I doubt it very much, and think a correction would be nice. Not much more to argue there, so goodnight.
posted by mediareport at 10:42 PM on September 28, 2006

Hey, ?!, chill the hell out. I like Olbermann a great deal. I've liked him since his commentary on Katrina. He's a good guy... one of the few on TV these days. I just think that that was a bad comparison to make. Jeez...
posted by brundlefly at 12:43 AM on September 29, 2006

Or... yeah. What mediareport said.
Man, I should read further before I respond!
posted by brundlefly at 12:45 AM on September 29, 2006

This Tokyo Rose dustup is way too picky. Olbermann said:

...by a propaganda company so blatant that Tokyo Rose would’ve quit...

Iva Toguri was pressed into employment as (one of the) Tokyo Rose(s). As such, she was not the most willing participant. If things were so bad that she quit, that would be bad. I think the analogy works, and is correct. In no way did KO impugn or malign Ms. Toguri.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 6:04 AM on September 29, 2006

mediareport: I didn't expect a response to me, but to the original point of the post. Before your derail. We've got no argument then. I hope you slept well.

And brundlefly: "Man, I should read further before I respond!". I agree. Looking back I wish I had put a line return after the link though. Still, I can't get any more chilled, but you did chime into the derail. So you should expect someone to comment on that.

Thanks Benny Andajetz.
posted by ?! at 7:42 AM on September 29, 2006