I believe I was the first to respond to Bruce Levinson's first article on ICANNWatch last February and queried whether the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness for whom he works was a front for deep pocket right wing interests (I did research CRE as best as Google allows). This led to an interesting exchange of private correspondence with Bruce which led me to believe I was wrong with my initial impression. I don't think I have ever publicly apologized for that, so let me do so here and now. Regardless, I would far rather see something posted that can be critiqued than have it preemtively disappeared.|
As it happens I was writing an article for ICANNWatch regarding another aspect of George Tenet's statements when Bruce Levinson's piece appeared. I could have written a similar article and, indeed, wouldn't have written it much differently, so I fail to see how there is something about it that apparently barely evaded your filters. As editors you of course have to make choices about what to publish, but I don't see anything about the submission in question being 'uninteresting, wrong, silly, [...or...] dangerous'.
I will hopefully eventually get to submitting my article regarding George Tenet, it is a work in progress and related events are continuing to unfold, and yes, if rejected, it would be only the second time that has happened to me here, the other being self-inflicted. I am at least as surprised by that as you seem to be sceptical. -g