How about some substantive arguments?
Reader comment on item: Laurie Mylroie's Shoddy, Loopy, Zany Theories – Exposed

Submitted by bill uzzle (United States), May 29, 2008 at 14:09

As Adlai Stevenson said about Dwight Eisenhower's pitiful campaign rhetoric in 1952. it's time we moved from the General to the specific.

Laurie Mylroie has made some specific and persuasive arguments, which Pipes would do well to lay out before he goes rabidly ad hominem. For example, in Bush Vs. the Beltway, she makes the best case I know of to account for the anthrax mailings in 2001. For starters, could we hear from Pipes on that?

Bill Uzzle

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Daniel Pipes replies:

I thought it's clear that I relied on Andrew McCarthy's essay to make the substantive arguments. I urge you to follow the link to his essay and read it in full.