sdraoul wrote on Mar 26, 2008 11:33 PM:April Neely writes: "Bill Kristol ---- who touted the weapons of mass destruction lie in 2003 and has supported the Bush war machine since ---- calling Obama "deceitful."

Unfortunately for her, she is the one who is deceitful. Either that or she is ignorant of the facts as known in 2003.

Every Western government and their intelligence agencies believed that Iraq had Weapons of Mass destruction. Iraq had used them against Iran and against its own people.

Bill Clinton's CIA Director told the President it was a "slam dunk" that Iraq had them.

So, how was Bill Kristol deceitful if he stood by what every single Intelligence agency in the world worth anything thought Iraq had WMDs?

Tell us, Ms Neely, please.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 27, 2008 6:52 AM:sdraul: The intelligence available and used did not pass the investigative objective method used by most all intelligence agencies. The information was wrong and misused to obtain approval from he American Congress and people to assent to a war in Iraq. Simultaneously, the United Nations inspectors did not find any weapons of mass destruction despite the fact of inspection right up to the forward ho command. Sadam knew how to play poker. He was successful for many years. He bluffed one time too many. CIA Director worked for Bush not Clinton at the time of the question. It is interesting how people like sdraul attempts to ascribe Bush's ineptness to Clinton. The CIA director as well as his subordinates permitted Bush to interpret the intelligence as he saw fit. I mean how could one say no to the President or doubt his good intentions. We sure know now.

LOL wrote on Mar 27, 2008 6:57 AM:sdraul: LOL at your blog. Same ole stuff from same ole sdraul. LOL. I wonder if we should add your statements to the 935 lies from Brush and his administration.

Roberto1 wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:06 AM:Obama's preacher demonized white people...and he can't properly repudiate it. Anyways, who is he? I've heard of Condi Rice, Colin Powell etc but Obama or is it Oprahbama?.

Oh Please wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:27 AM:Roberto1: Real question is who is Roberto1.

GFN wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:36 AM:To "Just Wondering", 4:34 pm yesterday...Wow, what a terrific post. Thank you.

GFN wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:44 AM:To SDraoul: Hans Blix, and a gang of UN inspectors, spent six months diligently searching the nation of Iraq for WMD’s in 2002 until February 2003, and not only did he not find any, but he reported that he was “quite certain” that there were none. And, he begged to remain engaged in his pursuit to prove his point. George W. Bush disallowed his request.

Mr. Blix recently described the Iraq war as a “tragedy—for Iraq, for the US, for the UN, for truth, and human dignity.” The responsibility of the war lies with the One Man who ignored the facts five years ago. It is the American people who are "Shocked" at the lies of this administration that have been uncovered, and "Awed" by the price of such a Blunder-Bush.

This administration knew exactly what it was doing; wake up, SD, you seem to be the only one who doesn't get it.

Vista Granny wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:48 AM:The horrible weapons once used against theier own by Iraq the were purchased from the good old USA. Remember, Sadam was once our buddy!

Oh Yeah wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:58 AM:Vista Granny: Very good point. Did Sadam also use them against Iran during their war?

Olaf wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:19 AM:Saddam had the weapons, used the weapons, and continued to threaten to use more weapons. You "head in the sand" types continue to gripe about things that are hindsight. Let's figure out how to get out of Iraq without a cut and run strategy of the Dem's... some in the world believe it is safer now then after 911. You may not but most of you give comfort to and coddle terrorist. SDraoul is right!

Olaf wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:25 AM:Obama's speech is exactly why he is done. he just chased all independants away from him. He was getting a lot of votes because he was not a Clinton or a Bush... now he has gone and linked himself to someone worse. A bigot in the pulpit who is linked to Farakhan. Who wants this? Not the independant minded voters who will now swing to someone else. To bad. He was interesting when he was speaking about unifying the country. I guess you can't unify with hate! Oh wait he did throw his grandmother under the bus, I guess he did unify the people from his "church"

Yokozuna wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:52 AM:Are you all aware there is another letters page for today. This one is from "the Californian" readers. The other one is from the North County Times readers and so far has no posts. Just to let you know.

Heckuva job, W wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:58 AM:Yep, that global war on terror, especially the Afghanistan front (where al Qaeda, you know, the ones that attacked us, are). From the NY Times QUOTE To arm Afghan forces to fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, the U.S. has relied on a fledgling company that has provided ammunition that is more than 40 years old. ENDQUOTE You really must read the whole article in the Times to get a sense of how lousy this ammo company is. Just another of the war profiteers that see Bush's war as a great payday, the war's aims be damned.

OBSERVATION wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:05 AM: John McCain yesterday said the United States can no longer assume the mantle of lone democratic superpower, attempting to break with President Bush's early foreign policy by saying the country is a first among equals and should ...

Alf wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:14 AM:Well, "sdraoul" at 11:33PM tries, one more time, to rewrite history. He won't even keep up with the LIES of GWB. Let's see, "it's Clinton's fault", "it's Clinton's advisors fault", "WMDs", "Iraq involved with Al Qaeda", etc., etc., etc.. Neither Clinton nor his advisors were responsible for the LIES that GWB told, the constant use of the words "Iraq" and "9/11" in the same sentence, even though Saddam hated Al Qaeda, even though the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi nationals and even though the terrorists were not trained in Iraq or even in Iraq before 9/11. "sdraoul", your assertion that "Every Western government and their intelligence agencies believed that Iraq had Weapons of Mass destruction." is beyond the fence out in left field and not true. If you insist on rewriting history, do not do it when verifiable facts are available that prove you to be wrong. Regards, Alf.

hardtack wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:29 AM:Arthur Schopenhauer offered this truism: "Truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." It seems that political hoaxes pass through three similar stages. Here are two quotes to jump-start ones memory:

(1) “We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” – Sen. Ted Kennedy, on Sept. 27, 2002;

(2) “It is clear... that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” – Sen. Hillary Clinton, Oct. 10, 2002.

To paraphrase Shopenhauer: Every successful hoax passes through three stages. First, the gullible are in the majority. Second, it is vociferously promoted in the media as truth. Third, over time, the majority insists they always knew it was a hoax.

I’m expecting “global warming” to pass through those three stages in the next decade.

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:57 AM:Olaf[-] wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:19 AM: Some people are hard headed. At the time of the inspections, Sadam did not have the weapons just as the UN inspectors stated.
He did not have them. He did not have them. He did not have them. None were found after we invaded. None were found after we invaded. None were found after we invaded. Now, you want us to get a plan going about Iraq. What in the heck was and is GWB doing? This blogger is an independent. I shall vote Obama.

Ms M wrote on Mar 27, 2008 10:24 AM:Olaf
[-] wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:25 AM: Obama's speech is exactly why he is done. Hate to dissappoint you. People realize that this is typical ugly politics. Yes, he and his supporters know that what Rev. Wright said was wrong, but it is not what Obama thinks or feels and voters are sick and tired of the politics of destruction. This one point that has been driven in the ground will pass. When you have a Fox newscaster (I think it was Chris Wallace ) say after two hours of Obama bashing enough is enough. Believe it or not, if you folks keep up with this denegration of Obama over what his minister said, Obama will prevail and garner more votes from Americans who are just sick of our negative elections. The reason why we got stuck with Bush is because we can't seem to have elections based on the canditates agenda. It would be great to see this blog just full of postings on the policies of the canditates, the good that they will do to fix the mess we are in and not the negative mud slinging. Why don't we read anything postive about McCain on this blog like we hear about Obama?

Ron wrote on Mar 27, 2008 10:38 AM:Yes, April E. Neely. "Obama's speech illustrates what sets him apart", I agree. I actually think Geraldine Ferraro had it about right, "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."
In Obama's speech he tried to change the subject, from him, to you. From what his racist pastor said, to how you felt about it. This is the Saul Alinsky dance, and the Obamaman is playing his hand well. I read that speech, in it's entirety. It was, in all fairness, a bait & switch tactic. He begins his speech with "We the people, in order to form a more perfect union." And quickly decents from that point to restate exactly what he has heard for 20 years in the pews of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Right into the Saul Alinsky version of American he believes, and was taught through Liberation Theology at Trinity. The "speech" was precisely aimed to his candidacy as an exercise in liberal affirmative action; and that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. Exactly as stated by Ferraro. The swooning of the left that followed the Obamaman speech, means it had hit it's mark, he had taken the "rules" other state they live by, and hold them against them. Use them, like a club, to extract what the Obamaman wants, votes.
He then rambles on about healthcare, and other current leftist causes, sealing the deal. This is the utopian aspect of his candidacy, and it fits exactly into those people laiden with white guilt. He simply is using his skills as a community organizer, expanded to a larger audience, to rally fellow leftists & socialists, bamboozle the unknowing & unwitting, and smooth it all over with a taste of "I'm just like you."
It was a great oratory, but great speeches do not give you experience.
All this guy has is ideas, given to him by Saul Alinsky & the Rev. Both hated America, and want a more socialist government.

Gordon wrote on Mar 27, 2008 10:41 AM:RE: "Oil not the answer..." is right on. All the easy oil reserves have been discovered.The recent field off Brazil's coast is 23,000 feet deep, and they had to drill through 1 mile of sand(extremely expensive)to find it.Projected cost is $1 billion minimum for infrastructure to even start recovering it. Oil shale production is expensive and uses tons of water with horrendous damage to watershed through runoff.ANWAR, Alaska, unlike 1 huge Prudoe Bay oil field, is in several smaller deposits,& the industry is lying about the footprint needed to recover it.Extreme conservation and alternatives are our only hope.

GFN wrote on Mar 27, 2008 10:51 AM:Iraq is once again exploding; pun intended; so much for the "Surge" working. I overheard GWB muttering, "Damn, it would take a dictator to control this country!!"

Chris wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:06 AM:Jack Strumpf asks "Did you ever see Israel deporting masses of people because the weren't Jewish?" I guess that like most Iraeli supporters Strumpg knows nothing of the ethnic cleansing carried out by the Israelis in 1948. Even today the Israelis are taking over more and more of what was to be Palestinian land for their settlements. But I am getting burned out in trying to educate the ignorant who will not ever change their mind.

Chris wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:15 AM:So we have PHoenix MacKenzie who is upset by all this hate toward "white people". No you see it is alright to hate Muslims, Vietnamese, homosexuals, Liberals and people in other countries that will not drink our kool aid. But if anybody has a problem with "white people" or "the US" then they are to be condemed for hating god's people who hate everybody else.

Chris to moderator wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:24 AM:My last two comments were meant to be for the letters printed in the Times here in Vista but I see that the letters here are only for those sent to the Califorinan. When are you going to get this mess straightened out. Why separate the two. Everytime I come out here something is different and screwed up. Get it together.

GFN seems to be right wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:56 AM:There's open warfare in Basra and thousands of Shiites are protesting against the elected government (also Shiite majority) in Baghdad. It does appear that if this keeps up, the surge will dissolve and be shown to be the result of Sadr's ceasefire more than anything that the US did. What a mess! And McCain's pitch is to brag about the surge and stay the course. Good grief. How in the world are we ever going to get out of there? How in the world is Iraq going to become a functioning nation again? What a mess!

request for hardtack wrote on Mar 27, 2008 11:59 AM:The rest of the story, please. Do you have any quotes from the 23 Senators that voted against giving Bush the ok to invade Iraq? There do seem to be a significant number of us who got it right, you know. Finding more people who got it wrong, no matter how many, will never replace the fact that so many of us got it right. You guys blew it. Let's move on to what the heck can be done now.

Just Wondering wrote on Mar 27, 2008 12:34 PM:Rancho Santa Fe may have newer computers than East SD (because the parents fund raised to get them), but they have access to the same internet, with the same information. The books in the library may be older, but they will still teach a 6 year old to read, if mom and dad take the time to do the homework. The pictures and graphics may have changed in a text between 1999 and 2007, but history is history and algebra is algebra. You get my drift. If you want to talk about the language issues, certainly you will admit that the lack of English is just as devestating to White students as Blacks, clearly we are on an even playing field there. Obviously, there are still issues with discrimination, still areas that need work, and I am more than happy to see those areas improved, But I am darn tired of being blamed for the Black Mans difficulties. I really believe we are to the point now where it the focus needs to shift from blame to accountability, improvements can always be made, but the basic tools are there.

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 27, 2008 12:42 PM:Yesterday's post by Just Wondering about Jason Whitlock's article was excellent. The article, concerning the Vogue Magazine cover featuring Labron James is right on-point. A recommended read for all in this racial discussion we've been having. Thanks JW!

Concerned-1 wrote on Mar 27, 2008 12:48 PM:As time goes on, I find myself modulating toward Alf's POV, although, not to that extreme. What would be so bad about walking away from Iraq? We would lose face? We wouldn't get the oil? Iraq would be in a civil war? Hmmm, don't look now but all three are already reality. I may be a fiscal conservative and vehement anti-socialist, but Ithink it's time we throw in the towel on this one. We lost. Game over.

Clifford wrote on Mar 27, 2008 12:48 PM:Chris is right. We say we are a "Christian" nation. Yet
we back everything Israel does. The Muslims believe in Christ also,-- the Quran teaches he was born of the Virgin Mary. Israel does not accept Christ or the New Testament. So the "Western Christians" are fighting the "Eastern Christians" to protect a non-Christian country. That doesn't make any sense to
me!

Karl wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:11 PM:I just heard that one poll has McCain with a 10 point lead over Obama and Clinton. What happened?

Focal Point wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:40 PM:Clifford: Muslims believe that Jesus Christ was a prophet. That does not make them, "Eastern Christians."

Oh Please! wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:42 PM:Karl[-] wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:11 PM: LOL. Please Karl. The political parties have not even attended their conventions. Polls have not mattered and will not matter until we actually vote. But, thanks for the info.

Ms M wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:45 PM:Karl
[-] wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:11 PM: Who did the poll? I think polls have run out. Most primary polls were wrong. Yesterday, Fox had McCain ahead and NBC had Obama ahead. It depends on who's conducting the polls. If you ever got a call for a national poll (which I did) you would not put too much faith in them. The questions that are asked are VERY misleading, steering a person in a certain direction. There are a lot of folks who don't have a clue what's going on. Some folks are very partisan. Some folks have cell phones and would never receive a call. Go figure.

Nick wrote on Mar 27, 2008 1:55 PM:Well said "Focal Point" @ 1:40pm, it is also the truth. The other thing "Clifford" doesn't realize is that with Islam, if you don't convert(which they would like the whole world to do), you are an Infidel and should be killed. Not the same for Judaism. They don't mind if you convert, but have no intentions of converting the world and killing all those who don't. I suggest "Clifford" do some research on Islam and Judaism and see the stark, contrasting differences and stop listening to people like "Chris", who support Terrorists and cowardly murderers who INTENTIONALLY target innocent women and children.

to Karl wrote on Mar 27, 2008 2:19 PM:I noticed too that McCain has grabbed the lead recently. Maybe the Obama-Clinton battles have shown people the worst about them. Or the sorry state of politics here now is that candidate we see and hear the least from is the best...absence is the most attractive quality someone can have when all the news is mud-slinging. But one thing seems sure: McCain has gotten free passes from the so-called liberal media, that's for sure. You never see him asked the hard questions. About his flip-flops. About his ignorance of economics. About his confusion in Iraq. About his embracing wacko evangelists. There's even a new book out, devoted entirely to the free pass McCain gets. Must be his history as a POW,etc that does the trick, that shields him from challenging questions. The author of that book, on the radio the other day, suggested that we look for interactions that McCain has had with Arizona journalists, who've been tougher on him over the years, to see how McCain responds to such challenges. Let's put it this way, his responses are often not good. Threatening. Temper outbursts. That kind of thing.

Ms M wrote on Mar 27, 2008 2:46 PM:to Karl
[-] wrote on Mar 27, 2008 2:19 PM: But one thing seems sure: McCain has gotten free passes from the so-called liberal media, that's for sure. Well Karl so it's the LIBERAL media giving McCain a pass .....um I think this goes to show that the media is Conservative. This is getting to be just too funny!

Ms M wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:00 PM:to Karl
[-] wrote on Mar 27, 2008 2:19 PM: Sorry for my post Karl. I think we are in agreement.

Jack_D wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:20 PM:Susan Kettner asks an interesting question: When will racism and bigotry end? There's no easy answer for that. I would guess, unfortunately, the answer is never- if you mean the complete end of racism everywhere. However, it has gotten better in the last 20-30 years ago. Millions of whites are voting for Barack Obama, and millions more will do so in November. There could not have been a black presidential candidate in the 1960s and 1970s. So we have made progress.

Alf wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:45 PM:Attention Moderator - Why are the NCTimes and Californian letters separated? Enquiring Alfs and many others want to know. Regards, Alf.

To Jack D wrote on Mar 27, 2008 3:45 PM:The question: When will racism and bigotry end? The answer: It will end when the people who complain they are discriminated against because of race and bigotry stop complaining. They perpetuate the cycle. My opinion only. To me it is the same as saying "The devil made me do it".

I'm just wondering, too wrote on Mar 27, 2008 4:03 PM:Isn't anyone concerned that the three choices we currently have to select as our next leader are McCain, Obama and Clinton? Clearly, and more than anytime in the past, the political infrastructure is inhibiting us from attracting the best and the brightest to lead our country! I never thought I would live long enough to see another President as inept as Jimmy Carter. But I have, with George W. Bush. And these three candidates look like that trend will continue.

Oh, Nick wrote on Mar 27, 2008 4:04 PM:You talk as though the "good guys" would NEVER target women and children, as if that kind of war-terror is only done by the bad people and that this makes us morally better. Yet, in the 1940's, for example, it was the zionists who used the car-bomb in markets and cafes in Palestine to get the arabs to leave. Once you develop sophisticated weapons, you can have the luxury of not "intending" to kill civilians (though, of course, you do kill thousands more than any suicide bomber does, and you know you will kill that many...but you are still "good" because you could've killed many more and nobly chose not to). And we, on our high horse, say that insurgents and guerillas are "cowardly" because they won't fight us in a way that we want them to, and which, coincidentally, favors our strengths. Even today, the Sadr militia will go toe-to-toe with the Iraqi police but won't engage the US in conventional warfare...because they know they'd lose! Does this make them cowards? Puh-lease. Don't you think that ANYONE in the world is entitled to have their own perspective on anything?

Now what? wrote on Mar 27, 2008 4:41 PM:It may be a false alarm, but folks, it does appear that the surge is unraveling. Shiites more or less defeated the Sunnis in and around Baghdad so the neighborhoods have been "cleansed" and violence is down accordingly. But Shiites are now battling Shiites in the south and insurgents are tossing mortars and missles into the Green Zone, where our people have taken to wearing flak jackets and spending more and more time in foxholes. The political leadership is nearly nonexistent, and we have 140,000 troops, plus at least that many "contractors" there in limbo, doing police work. Yet again, one of the major oil pipelines has been interrupted via a bomb. McCain says we stay the course. Is that the best we can do? Aside from the usual yahoos here who think the answer is "kill everyone", are there actually any helpful notions about how to proceed in this quagmire?

Sad but true wrote on Mar 27, 2008 4:46 PM:It may well be that Obama sunk himself with his race speech. The reason? He displayed his intelligence. Many Americans hate that. Makes them feel intimidated and dumb, and they respond as if someone were scamming them...it's their way of saving face. Other than JFK, I cannot recall anyone even remotely intellectual in his presentation that has done well in an American election. Too many of us hate real brains, subtlety, complicated reasoning, truth. So we tend to elect people who try to appeal to us by playing dumb, playing simple...and what we get is the result. The more complicated the world gets, the more we are doomed unless we change.

hardtack wrote on Mar 27, 2008 5:48 PM:“Request for hardtack,” please don’t make me reinvent the wheel. This blog must be replete with my supportive comments of Ron Paul. (I think he is, technically, still in the “race”). Hope springs eternal . . . . . . . . . . . . in some of us.

to to Jack D wrote on Mar 27, 2008 6:22 PM:Are you serious? So the entire burden of racism in America falls, in your opinion, on the backs of minorities who are, in effect, making it up. In only a short post you have the nerve to say that the personal experiences of millions of people is a fiction that is used to get out of responsibility. How many insults in such a short space! Yours has to be one of the most ignorant posts I have ever seen here, and that's saying a lot. Especially when in the last couple of days, if you've been reading this space, you learned that submitting a resume with a "black sounding" name on it reduces the chances the submitter has of getting an interview, compared to the identical resume with a non-black-sounding name. Clearly this is racism. So who could be "using it" to complain?

It's not that bad, to wondering too wrote on Mar 27, 2008 6:26 PM:When I look at McCain, Clinton, and Obama, I see three people vastly more qualified to be President than G W Bush, more intelligent, more competent, more honest, more skilled, more American (if that means someone who really believes in the vision of the founders and the Constitution), more courageous, more experienced, wiser, more knowledgable, morally superior. Yes, I dislike and disrespect W that much, and have felt that way since he first began campaigning in 1999...and, like many others, I had him pegged perfectly.

Clifford wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:00 PM:Oh Nick and Focal Point. I have been studying Religion for many years. The Crusades were started by the 'Western Christians". The "Inquisition" was not from the Muslims. They consider Jesus as the Messiah which the Israelis do not. People always hate that which they don't understand.
In fact,--The Qur’an tells us a lot of wonderful things about Jesus. As a result, believers in the Qur’an love Jesus, honour him, and believe in him. In fact, no Muslim can be a Muslim unless he or she believes in Jesus, on whom be peace.

Chris to Nick wrote on Mar 27, 2008 8:52 PM:Once again you show that you don't know anything about history. You only can spout partison rhetoric. To say that our problem in the muslim world is caused by their unjust hatered for infedels is bunk. After all just because we drop bombs on them is no reason to hate us.

esteban wrote on Mar 27, 2008 9:36 PM:Hey Clifford, tell that to the lunatic muslims that wanna kill us...you know, Chris' heroes.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 28, 2008 7:42 AM:Clifford wrote on Mar 27, 2008 7:00 PM You have missed some classes. Muslims consider Jesus a great prophet. They have no need of a Messiah. They belive. "There is only one god, Allah and Mumhamed is his prophet" Muslims are not, eastern Christians.