Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com has Petraeus' spokesman (a Colonel, no less) by the short hairs...

[WilliamPitt]

Three detailed Greenwald blog posts, in chron order from early Sunday morning to 2am today:

A bizarre, unsolicited e-mail from Gen. Petraeus' spokesman
Sunday October 28, 2007 07:18 EST

I received this morning an unsolicited email from Col. Steven A. Boylan, the Public Affairs Officer and personal spokesman for Gen. David G. Petraeus (see UPDATE III below). The subject line of the email -- which I am publishing in full, unedited form here -- is "The growing link between the U.S. military and right-wing media and blogs," which is the title of the post I wrote earlier this week regarding the politicization of the Army in Iraq, as evidenced by its constant coordination with, and leaking to, the likes of Matt Drudge, The Weekly Standard, and the most extremist right-wing blogs -- in the TNR/Beauchamp case and also more generally.

I had a prior e-mail exchange with Col. Boylan several months ago when I requested an interview with Gen. Petraeus after he had granted an exclusive interview to far-right partisan Hugh Hewitt (author of the 2006 prescient tract: Painting the Map Red: The Fight to Create a Permanent Republican Majority). In terms of whether the U.S. Army under Petraeus and Boylan is, in fact, becoming a political actor, I'll let multiple passages from Boylan's email to me this morning speak for itself:

The issues of accuracy, context, and proper characterization is something that perhaps you could do a little research and would assume you are aware of as a trained lawyer.

I do enjoy reading your diatribes as they provide comic relief here in Iraq. The amount of pure fiction is incredible. Since a great deal of this post is just opinion and everyone is entitled to their opinions, I will not address those even though they are shall we say -- based on few if any facts. That does surprise me with your training as a lawyer, but we will leave those jokes to another day. . . .

You are either too lazy to do the research on the topics to gain the facts, or you are providing purposeful misinformation -- much like a propagandist. . . .

More: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/10/28/boylan/index.html

=====

Abject stupidity defined
Monday October 29, 2007 12:51 EST

If there is a place with more abject stupidity swirling around than the right-wing blogosphere, I'd like to know where it is. Truly, consider what has to be going on inside their brains for this to happen:

Yesterday, in writing about the email I received from Col. Boylan's email address, I published two versions of the email -- the full, unedited version (here), as well as lengthy excerpts from the email in the post I wrote about it. I made this as clear as could be -- for anyone capable of reading English. The first two sentences of my post -- the very first two -- said:

I received this morning an unsolicited email from Col. Steven A. Boylan, the Public Affairs Officer and personal spokesman for Gen. David G. Petraeus. The subject line of the email -- which I am publishing in full, unedited form here -- is "The growing link between the U.S. military and right-wing media and blogs" . . . .

The link went to the full, unedited version of the email I received from Col. Boylan's email account, which I published without edits of any kind. Then, in the very next paragraph, I explained that I was going to post selected excerpts from that email:

In terms of whether the U.S. Army under Petraeus and Boylan is, in fact, becoming a political actor, I'll let multiple passages from Boylan's email to me this morning speak for itself:
I then proceeded to post 9 excerpted passages from the email.

In the post, I wrote: "Anyone who would like to have forwarded to them a copy of the email I received originally can email me and I will send it." Several people emailed me to make that request, and I forwarded them the email, including -- apparently -- one right-wing blogger who calls himself "Dread Pundit."

More: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/10/29/right_wing_blogs/index.html

=====

Follow-up on the Col. Steven Boylan e-mail exchange
Monday October 29, 2007 14:27 EST

Howard Kurtz -- who dives head-first into every hysterical controversy manufactured by our nation's right-wing war cheerleaders -- was asked during his Washington Post chat today about the various emails I received from Col. Boylan yesterday (as well as objections raised to my having published the prior emails Boylan and I exchanged), and Kurtz replied (h/t Thomas C):

It's a very strange tale. I'm not sure what to make of it. I think Boylan's complaint had more to do with the publication of what he contends is a fake e-mail sent by someone else. These days, government officials know that if they send an e-mail to a reporter or commentator it's going to be used, unless specifically marked as an off-the-record communication.

Why isn't Kurtz "sure what to make of it," and why doesn't he do some work and find out? Ultimately, this "strange tale" -- which is a significant story regardless of what actually happened -- is not complicated. There are only two possibilities, both of which are self-evidently newsworthy. Either:

(1) Col. Boylan sent me that first polemical, blatantly politicized email and then falsely denied having sent it, or,

(2) someone has the extraordinary ability to fabricate emails which have every appearance -- even to advanced computer experts -- of being authored by and sent from the computers of some of our highest-ranking military officials in Iraq (or, worse, to obtain direct access to their Centcomm computers), a possibility about which Col. Boylan expressed total indifference and then refused to address.

If someone really is able to replicate emails from high-ranking military officials in Iraq, think about what a serious breach that is. Can the fabricators also send emails to commanders in the field or to political decision-makers in Washington?

If what Col. Boylan claims happened is what really happened, that would be a rather big story. Since Col. Boylan has indicated that he refuses to answer my questions about any of these matters ("What I am doing about it does not concern you . . . I w not take the time or efforts to engage with you"), shouldn't there be reporters somewhere interested in finding which of those two highly significant events has occurred?

Numerous commentators have suggested that, contrary to Col. Boylan's denials, the facts strongly support the conclusion that he was the author of that email. Numerous others have noted the vital issue which the exchange raises, regardless of whether the first email came from Col. Boylan or someone fabricating emails in his name: namely, the transparent ways in which many high-ranking members of the U.S. military in Iraq have become overtly political, partisan actors.

More: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/10/29/boylan/index.html

[cali]

1. Man, what shocked me as much as the idiot things Boylan

said in his email to Greenwald, is the fact that the fool can't write an English sentence to save his life. And he's a Public Affairs officer? Just pitiful.

[lateo]

3. It isn't surprising to me at all.

My twin brother is a Major in the Army. That email from Boylan looked just like some of the emails my brother has sent me over the years.

[papau]

2. The Wash Post Kurtz was his usual see no evil in the GOP self - amazing any take Kurtz seriously n/t

n/t

[Coexist]

4. quite an exchange.

[gratuitous]

5. Mischief managed

I submit the controversy (if there is to be a controversy) has already passed from Boylan, just as he hoped with his elliptical responses to Greenwald's perfectly reasonable questions. The controversy, if there is to be one, will now become why Greenwald hates the troops, how dare he criticize soldiers on the ground, and why do the media persist in trying to make us lose the war? Kurtz' amazing inability to see what is plainly before his eyes (because his continued employment and big fat paycheck depend heavily on his not seeing it) will ensure that the controversy centers on Greenwald's harrassment of poor Boylan, who's fighting so hard for Greenwald's freedom.

Just you wait.