Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (35753)	1/20/2004 8:02:26 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Message 19710059

To: lurqer who wrote (35753)	1/20/2004 12:05:39 PM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

It's always a little difficult to get a "bead" on what the people are thinking. The establishment media tend to filter through a lens that colors and distorts. Even "Letters to the Editor" suffer. However, they can sometimes provide a glimpse. Here are some from two papers - one large and one small. Washington Post Paul H. O'Neill has been characterized in the press recently as an unimportant, ignored member of the Cabinet in which he served; myopic; a leaker of secret documents; and a sore loser. All for saying what is common knowledge: that the Bush administration was jockeying to reshape the Middle East well before Sept. 11, 2001. This is a matter of public record. Whatever one thinks about the wisdom of our war in Iraq, one thing seems irrefutable: The threat posed by Iraq was oversold. Liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, Americans deserved a better explanation of why the country was about to embark on an undeclared war and send soldiers into harm's way. Bashing Mr. O'Neill is merely diversionary. THOMAS LAWSON Fort Valley, Va. Having just finished reading "The Price of Loyalty," the book about Paul H. O'Neill's experiences in the Bush Cabinet, I feel the Jan. 15 editorial ["Mr. O'Neill and Iraq"] did a disservice to The Post's readers through its use of selected quotes. The book clearly illustrates how decisions are made in the White House without the benefit of process or policy formation. Its insights are not a "half-dubious account" of anything but the basis for greater investigation of the road taken to the Iraq war as well as other administration policies. TED HARSHA Silver Spring washingtonpost.com Nevada County Union Support troops by withdrawing now Kent Smith Anyone who has thought about it knows we're in Iraq for its oil. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's insider revelations only confirm this truth. The WMD "threat" was just a pretext to dupe the American people, as the real evidence on the ground has shown. Bush and his oil-and-arms cabal always wanted the oil and reconstruction boodle but knew the American people wouldn't sacrifice for their greedy schemes - so they manufactured and sold lies based on fears. The latest phony war goal is to build "democracy." Trouble is, the Iraqis know all about phony democracy and puppet governments from bitter years under Saddam. They will resist our foreign military occupation until we finally leave and allow true "Iraq for the Iraqis" democracy. The only question is when do we pull out - at what huge cost in broken lives and wasted billions. Support our troops by withdrawing them now. Let the U.N. take over. Reject Bush's bloody, oily, endless wars. Kent Smith Nevada City theunion.com lurqer