They should rot in hell if there was one. They are not likely to be written up in "Profiles in Courage." What exactly is the worst they feared could have happened to them for having the patriotism to try to save this country from disaster. I doubt it involved their deaths and that of their family and relatives. I understand evil, it needs no explanation, but I have trouble with people who say they are good or want to be looked upon as good but allow evil to happen.

While we're discussing critics (or the lack thereof) of the Bushies, please check out today's Digby post regarding Ashleigh Banfield, a former MSNBC reporter who was demoted (and subsequently fired) after she gave a controversial speech (posted with links). It's quite a speech. Whether one has respect for her journalistic capabilities or not, one must at least respect the cajones it took to give the speech post-invasion, pre-codpiece (with nods to Digby). BTW, keep up the good work. CWKO is now our sole TV news source.

King George - Mission Accomplished http://tellusthemission.org/ Watch the video. Add your own banner.

As a resident of Illinois I must defend my senator. Before the war Durbin told everyone who would listen it was a big mistake and that he did not agree with what the administration was doing. He said then that as a member of the intellegence commitee he did not see evidence that should lead us into war. No one listened. The only reason he can talk about it now 4 1/2 years later is that democrates are now in charge of the senate. He had no way of knowing what a fiasco this president would actually cause. While in hindsight it is easy to say he should have forgone any hope for his political future and spoke out. At the time no one was listening to him and to think that if he had released classified information it would have prevented a war and not just ended his career is absurd. What about all the republicans on the committee who still have not come clean they were in charge. KO should have him on the show to talk about it. As for Tenant he sat behind Colin Powell at the UN and by not speaking to prevent the war he is absolutly complicent in the war crimes of this administration.

"WHERE WERE YOU PEOPLE WHEN WE NEEDED YOU?" I couldn't have said it ANY better myself! And where was Powel? Instead of "resigning" for "family reasons" he should have quite, but they were all in on it. This supposed coming out about the start of the war may itself be FURTHER diversionary tactics to lead us to think it was just a stupid decision when it was a decisive and deliberate attempt of literal genocide and colonial action against the arab world with oil only as a nice reward.

Yes,Keith, you're right. SOMETHING SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE! Please please please, do a special comment tonight about this; it's VERY NECESSARY! As Rhett Butler said to Scarlett O'Hara in "Gone With the Wind": "You think that by saying 'I'm sorry' all will be forgiven." Gentlemen, this is too little, too late. All the carnage and lost lives you see cannot be undone.

Here we go with the Abilene Paradox again. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rove, Rumsfield, Tenet and a few others sat in a circle and decided it would be a good idea to invade Iraq. After driving into Iraq they found it was just too damn hot and hurried back home to the White House to find a place where they could cool off from the heat. Finally, exhausted and worn out, they made it back to their circle and passed the kool-aide around. Then each looked at the other and asked, whose great idea was this in the first place! Not mine said Bush, not mine said Cheney, not mine said Rice, Rove and Rumsfield. Then as they all looked at Tenet he exclaimed hey, don't look at me, it was not my idea, I never wanted to go in the first place. We may make a decision or just be part of a larger group decision, but once accountability comes due for that decision it most assuredly was someone else's decision.

Like Colin Powell, George Tenet and maybe Dick Durbin are guys who --if they had had the courage of their convictions -- should have resigned before the disaster, rather than after it. Paging Elliot Richardson.

Lori, Thank you! I wondered whatever happened to Ashleigh Banfield. But to stay on the subject matter I will use a quote that I once read many years ago. When you don't speak out against the tyranny you become part of the tyranny. Exodus 20:16 forbids false testimony, from my undestanding knowing the truth and not speaking out is the same. Those who knew the truth and did not speak out have become part of the lie. I pity the people who did not speak out because they will live with this the rest of their lives.

George Tenent got what the Bush administration wanted to give him: the Medal of Freedom and a quick kick out of the door. If it isn't too difficult to remember, Dubya was cherry picking his intelligence from the Department of Defense and the committee setup by Doug Feith in the Pentagon. This was the president's resource for intelligence and not the CIA. While Cheney was going back and forth to the CIA with the expressed purpose of essentially shutting down the CIA in favor of Feith's rose-colored information, Tenent was simply the figurehead for intellectual information gathering and not a viable source for that intelligence. As such that Medal of Freedom was simply a cover for a dismissal from government based upon falsehoods. Anybody with a lick of sense can remember Richard Clark's work as well as the first Secretary of the Treasury's tome, each indicating that Iraq was always on the president's radar and just after the 2000 election. Tenent's new book is too little and too late. His integrity was besmerched the moment he got that medal and ushered out of his CIA job and now he is coming back to try and set the record straight! Enough is known about the "Slam Dunk!" assessment of Tenent and if he didn't know what was going on despite his assessments on 60 Minutes, his book probably will reveal very little other than his outrage over his loss of dignity which he notes accusatorily in that presentation on 60 Minutes. I realized what the Medal of Freedom orcheestration was at the time it occurred. Trouble is, Tenent is just now realizing that offense. It is true that all one has is his dignity and trust but if George Tenent didn't realize what Bush was doing at the time,as Director of the CIA, he should have. Reading the book by another CIA operative Tyler Drumheller about Mr. Tenent's concerns, Drumheller also intimates his feelings that George Tenent should have known the outcome. In essence, Tenent's own name was used to affirm the Iraqi conclusions to go to war and if he didn't know this, his expectations which he is realizing now should not come as a surprise. If an Alfred Q. Prized was knighted by Queen Victoria, he became, like Mr. Tenent after the Medal of Freedom debacle, Sir Prized!

Just a couple more rat's deserting a sinking ship. Nice job sniffing these two out Keith.

You know, upon further thought, what Dick Durbin knew other democratic senators (like maybe Kerry and Clinton?) also knew. No wonder they haven't been able to take a consistent position on the war. It really isn't that they didn't have the same intelligence that the administration had (as Senator Clinton now claims), it may actually be that they did have the same intelligence, but voted for the war anyway. Oh. My. God.

I like this part of what Tenant wrote: "there was no doubt in my mind at the time that Saddam Hussein possessed unconventional weapons. In retrospect, we got it wrong partly because the truth was so implausible,”. Everyone in the world thought that Saddam had WMD. It gives lie to the common George Soros liberal contention that Bush lied. Bush and company got it wrong, but they didn’t lie. There is a difference between getting something wrong and lying, and if I have to explain that difference then I’ll have to wonder where the questioner stands within the IQ distribution curve.

Since we know that absolute political and personal loyalty is required of everyone who works for or around the current administration, why should we believe anything the "General" has to say about increased violence in Iraq if we (the USA)pull out. Anyway, at this point, do we care if there is. I love these pronouncements that rarely come true....and if they do....why can't we deal with it then. I just need to say that personally I have never felt such skepticism in my whole long life as I have since this administration came to power. I do not believe anything that is said and to me, that is the greatest tragedy and fallout of the current situation.

Scott I had unconventional weapons when I was a kid,a sling shot,rocks,a dirt clods. So here is the deal its like the Soviets using a pencil to write in Space.We new there were no weapons of mas destruction.Don't you think a phone call to Israeli Intelligence which seem to have a little more vested interest in this region would have would have cleared up any doubts we hadn't picked up by the over flights we had been making for years and those supplied by the Wilson's.What the hell Scott.The Israelis didn't think they had WMD or they would have kicked some serious ass they have far more to loose immediately. Be warned Iran and world the show down is coming.I didn't think they had WMD,my brother who was an Intel guy in Nam looked at those photographs Powell sold the UN and laughed.What a snow job.Fool me once.....

Durbin did not vote for this war and the administration only agreed to brief the two senior democratic senators on the intellegence committee who were Durbin and Rockafeller. The then swore them to secracy. What about the republican leadership who saw what Durbin saw and voted for the war. If Durbin had shared his info he would have been arrested on charges of releasing classified information. Bush had a 70% approval rating and a rep. house and senate and the media was only interested in speaking to war mongers.

Hard to believe possible, but any trust I had in our government has just been squashed...... How can those who have been given the ultimate responsibility of protecting the American people, from without AND within, purposely reject such responsibility, and sit back to watch our fellow countrymen die in the stupidity that is Iraq? Shameful and disgusting.......

There may be something to the "difference between a lie and a mistake" statement, but the crime of that is the unflinching refusal to acknowledge the mistake, and the subsequent deaths of the thousands of men and women from our armed forces. That is what I find to be truly abhorrent, and turns my stomach. Semantics are semantics, and do not try to foist them upon straight-thinking folks, who will know them for what they are: Sorry excuses for abuse of position and power.

"Where were you people ?" While I agree with the sentiment, a more important question is "where was our MEDIA when we needed them"? The answer is riding on the same planes and attending the same cocktail parties with the culprits and NOT asking the hard questions that needed answers. Perhaps the saddest part of the past six years has been the emasculation of the American media. Sure Keith does one of his "Dennis Miller Style Rants", without the humor, every now and again, and most are compelling, but few people see them as his program is on MSNBC. And even fewer will now after the Imus disaster. Most of the time our main stream press is more concerned about attending White House correspondents dinners, and showing up on one of the Sunday talk shows than doing the kind of work they used to do. I always am amazed when eight journalists sit around the round table and compliment each other on the one program. Why not have six journalists ASK QUESTIONS of those in power rather than discuss amongst themselves. And the newspapers would rather have front page coverage of Anna Nicole and Sanjaya then Alberto Gonzales and Robert Gates. How about a story looking into WHY Proctor and Gamble threatened to cancel NBC Advertising unless Imus was fired. Do you really think it was about a stupid comment made by the old shock jock? Perhaps it was because Imus had been, for months touting his wife's non toxic products over the likes of Tide and Windex. We need real investigative journalists to once again file the kind of stories that won pulitzer prizes rather than have journalists become part of the culture they are supposed to be covering.

What does it matter if Bush lied or not. The question remains, why did we invade Iraq. It can't be because he possessed WMDs and because he was a little off his rocker. If that was enough justification then it must be a given that as soon as Iran develops a nuclear weapon, and because their Presdient is a little whackey as well, we will invade Iran. Is this true, And if not true then why not? It was enough reason to invade Iraq. And how about North Korea. They have WMDs and their leader is certainly a wacko. What if a radical group knocks off the Pres. of Pakistan. They have WMDs and those leading the radical front must be whackey, do we invade Pakistan. Both sides of this arguement need to just forget the the lies or half truths or no lies. It does not matter. We had no business invading Iraq in the first place, period. And if you think we did have justification for those reasons stated above (WMDs + a whackey leader + caring less about their people or other nations around them) then who is next. Shall we line them up and take them on one at a time or would it be best just to drop our WMDs on 1/3 of the world to finish the job quickly.

Perhaps Senator Durbin (and maybe Senator Rockefeller, too) needed to do more than merely vote against the war. The rest of us, including maybe Senators Kerry and Clinton, clearly did not understand what their votes were saying. Maybe they needed to make a grander gesture, such as openly quitting the committee, like the FISA Court judge did, when he decided he couldn't take it any more. That act spoke volumes. Of course, as it turns out, that act was probably equally futile.

There is a simple solution: SPECIAL PROSECUTOR -- Impeachment and criminal prosecution now of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowtiz, Feith, Perle and ANYONE at the secret energy task force meeting. You think $4 a gallon gas is an accident? Charge them with treason to hold them while conducting further investigation. Use treason as treason charges would remove both Bush and Cheney as CIC. Seize their assets [every damn dime], send them to prison or execute them as needed. Do not stop the investigations at our borders. Follow the trail all the way back to Saudi Arabia. Get ALL the criminals. This is important. Why? Because the law applies to us all or it applies not at all. Have you figured that out yet, Congress? Constitutional crisis? You are running the risk of revolution if you do not do your sworn Constitutional duty to protect this country and its founding documents from evil men like Bush and Cheney. They are not confused, or misled, or anything else but EVIL, get it? How much more evidence of criminal activity do you need? Is a blow job required? DO YOUR DAMN JOBS, CONGRESS!!!!!!

One other thing if I may. C'mon people. When this thing started the majority (not all) but the majority of Americans supported taking out Saddam. Sure, there were some that had reservations, but very few came right out and said no way Jose. Many jumped on the band wagon because most believed (including both sides of the political isle) that Saddam had WMDs. Others supported this invasion because they were to stupid to do their own research (which didn't require a great deal of research) to find out that Saddam had nothing to do with the Twin Towers. Others thought that perhaps Saddam was holding dinners at one of his palaces every night for Bin Laden. But no matter the reason Bush had the backing of the majority of this country when he entered this war. So this country, as a whole, has some soul-searching to do. But, for those who have continued to support this stay the course Bush strategy are the real knuckleheads. And for a President and an administration to continue this debacle is criminal, maybe not legally Scott, but morally. And if this fight continues without a change in course I truly believe that Bush, Cheney, Rice and any other administration official who will not see the light like the rest of us have, should somehow, someway, be held responsible, if not legally then at least morally, for their criminal and careless behavior.

i'm with you todd, impeach, impeach, impeach. i dont understand why dennis kucinich is the only one out there willing to put impeachment out there. are they so afraid that the electorate will throw them out?? please - they WILL throw the dems out if they dont start doing something that has some results. go after the bushies, the dominionists, the neocons. do it NOW!

“What does it matter if Bush lied or not. The question remains, why did we invade Iraq.” As you might guess C A, I have a theory about why. 1. I thinks the Americans in general were looking for a fight – revenge is a strong motivator, so that there was some political calculations. I think bin Lauden and al Quada initiated 9-11 for that exact purpose. We fell into the trap. The Iranians saw this as a prime opportunity to remove a long time enemy and fed US intelligence false data. We eagerly accepted their false data as further proof that action was required. Iraq had been violating UN resolutions for quite a while, and targeting our air craft patrolling the “no fly” zones. I think there were a verity of legitimate and not so legitimate reasons. 2. I think Iraq was targeted also for geo-political reasons, it is smack dab in the middle of the Arab peninsula – the administration thought by having a strong military presence there we could put more pressure on Saudi Arabia to assist in taking down al Quada – after all most of the money and personal supporting al Quada originated from Saudi. Instead of taking out the ants one at a time we go to the nest. Unfortunately we did not fully understand the nature of what we were getting into resulting in the current chaos. This is where you and I diverge though CA, I think both al Quada and Iran wants us to leave Iraq and to do so would support their objectives and ambitions.

Maybe I was too hard on Durbin. I did try to make a distinction between those who were evil and those who were good but allow evil to happen. Yes he may have gotten arrested for treason if he spoke out and in hindsight that would have been a worthwhile trade versus several hundred thousand people dying; he would have been vindicated in the end. I will cut him slack in that he may not have believed that Bush could be so evil and that it might turn out OK anyway. After all there seem to be 25% of the population even at this stage who are either slow learners or incapable of believing what has happened and is happening. I have heard that most of the Jews on the trains being "relocated" in Nazi Germany would not believe something as preposterus as death camps even after being told. It is human nature. But is is hard for me to understand how anyone could think that going to war would not result in death and how they could weigh those deaths against their careers.

RE: "Where were you": Mr. Olberman, from my emails and posts to this site, you know I am an ardent admirer of yours. I must take issue with you on this one though. As said in one of the posts above: Where was the media? I lived in DC for 10 years and worked some political party functions. I KNOW how close press persons are with the goverment. I KNOW that they often know more about things than some of our elected officials. I am certainly not saying anything to support either Tenet or Durbin but where were you guys? For instance, I will not believe for a minute that the DC-based news organization people didn't know about the congressional page abuse before that story broke. Evidently it had been going on for years. I knew (as did most thinking Americans) that the liklihood (sp?) of Sadaam having usuable WMDs was unlikely as Clinton has already worked on that issue. Where was the press when this sudden urgency was "revealed". Now, we have the media picking apart what was, erroneously, called a debate last night. The "important points"? Who scored a hit? Who brought down the house? What was attractive? Who was entertaining? As I said to your associates in First Read, I'm not looking for entertainment in these debates. I'm looking for information. If we as a people continue to expect entertainment, we'll get that. If we as a people expect substance, we might have a chance to get that. I am more disappointed in the media's "analysis" of this event than I am in the event itself. Hard to do when I had so little expectation from an event held to early in the game to begin with. I had expected, because it IS so early in the game, to get only mild introductions to the candidates. Part of the problem we have in dealing with the current administration is that the media totally abdicated its role as an independent press during the last 6 years. It appears to me that the media has resorted to the lazy tactics of reporting only "he said, she said" instead of doing any substantive investigation of real events. Again, you are one of my remaining hopes for the news media, Mr. Olbermann but I had to say all this. Please don't let me down. In any commentary you write on this, please ask where you and your professional collegues were as well. Thank you.

Scott...We are already doing Iran's objectives for them Scott by bankrupting the country financially,morally,and sending it's finest to a meat grinder.They want us in Iraq.Go on over and report how well all this is going.Then while you guys run around screaming no new taxes to get themselves elected and creating record deficits tell me what Iran an al Quida want ? They like Rudy G+ Fear do not dictate the foreign policy of this country.Foreign govts do not dictate our policy but you damn fools wouldn't know anything about diplomacy.You got rid of your best chance.General Powell.So fire away with all your Bush justifications.The fact is the dead are still dead,the bill for the war is getting bigger,the wounded will be wounded for life,those that were there will be wounded for life so will this country and all those in Iraq.Isreali Intel knew what was there before the war.We could have have went the cheap route and gave Isreal a call for Intel as well as listened to the Wilsons.The fact is Jr. didn't even listen to his daddy or his Generals.So whine on about whatever and try and justify the biggest mass murder in history but the dead are still dead.We are all suffering from PTSD.There is not too much left except for the bullshit trying to justify this insanity.

Scott: Thank you for explaning your theory in response to my question regarding invading Iraq. Let me chew on it a bit, as well as our disagreement on the terriorists and Iran's current desires and objectives. I see there is some agreement on the presence of illegitimate reasons for invading Iraq. As for those reasons you felt were legitimate I have to give those more thought as well. I may not agree but I am reading your comments with serious consideration and with some things to think about because they were not posted with any barbs or name calling being thrown back and forth. Thanks

I think that both al Quada and Iran wants us to stay in Iraq and to do so is supporting the building of the terrorist orginization and the tearing down of the American way. All America suffers as we throw all our money down the Hali-money pit. Attacking Iraq could have been Ben Laudens ideal. Saddam was the enemy of al Quada. What a plan, you attack the U.S. and then instead of going after you, the U.S. attacks your enemy and lets you escape. Then we have to stay in Iraq, because now it is the front on the war on terror. Way too busy and the troops stretched way too thin to go after the real terrorist. It would not surprise me to find out that the al Quada rigged the elections to let the bush win. Al Quada supports stupid war mongers. Safer with a republiCANT, NEVER.

Never trust a man with dollar signs in his eyes. (Selling his book) If Tenet pushed his book as "The intelligence was correct WMD were found just like I said" do you think anyone would buy it? His current "Truth" is just as false and distorted as his previous "Truth" about WMDs.

Keith, I hope your keep this latest revelation on the front burner. Being a resident of Utah, I can say that I am not disappointed by Senator Hatch's vote, disgusted maybe, but not disappointed.

Bobby C Sacramento,CA (Sent Friday, April 27, 2007 4:30 PM) You said “So whine on about whatever and try and justify the biggest mass murder in history..”. That is quite a claim considering uhhh, history. It does not help your argument to use emotive language and exaggeration, in fact one tends to ignore when those kind of tactics are used.

Gigi, Avalon, California (Sent Friday, April 27, 2007 5:03 PM) If they wanted us to stay in Iraq you know what they would do? They would begin bombing here in the US, the minute they do that the American people would want revenge and we know they are in Iraq now. This may give a clue as to why they are not aggressively operating here. Your argument just doesn't pass the smell test.

Keith, may I suggest that you transfer to NBC's affillitate, Al Jazzera. I find it really scary that people like you are popular among certain pockets of people with sheer hatred in their hearts. If we can survice the Clinton years, we will certainly survive the Bush years. That's what so great about America and Americans, we are resillent. The problem with the Iraqi situation is what went wrong in Vietnam. The politicians ran the war, not the military, unlike World War II. We won that because the military called the shots, not the idiots in Congress. Both sides then, and both sides now are completely self centered, ego-maniacs, and totally have no clue except what is best for them individually. What we as Americans really need to do is to exert our right under the Constitution, and have 2/3rd's of the States ratify "firing" the entire government (dumbocrats, repulsivcans, idiotpendents, livertarians, socialoutcasts, and start over.!

Well Keith,Countdown,and The Blog Team, Thank you so much for your great the great show.I am going to stop blogging for awhile.I can hear those editors sighs of relief as well as those of you who have put up with my ever grammar filled posts. C A I'll remembering your Sons along with thousands of others Son's as well as Our Country ,and Iraqi Families in my "Ricky Bobby" graces at meal time . You and Pam Keep the code.Scott you can not fix a lie with more lies kinda like alcoholic denial deal. So thanks you all deserve medals for having put up with me.I'll be back later.I am going to get back to calling and writing Congressional Offices. Oh Keith the folks over in Congressman Murtha's office reaaly like the show.You already knew that.:)

How come the only time the truth comes out is when there is something in it (money from a book deal, media attention, etc.) for the newly christened "lemme tell you the whole truth" guy? These people are shameless! How about telling the truth when it really mattered? When it would have educated the public about the dangers of sending in so few troops (retired generals) or the invasion of a country based on lies (George Tenet among others). These people are PUBLIC SERVANTS who are only serving a regime and ideology and not the public they are paid to serve. And how about reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine so the public cannot be subjected to the continuing drum-beat of propaganda. It's almost like if you say it's a nice day you need one expert who thinks it isn't and another who thinks it is when it's sunny and 75 degrees. The American people need truth and information and instead we are fed a never ending litany of spin and BS.

Four years later there are still many that remain in this administration that have things that the public needs to know but will not speak out until after the 2008 election. They will all be crawling out of the woodwork like the spineless worms they are. I am positive we have only scratched the surface of what all has been done in the backrooms of the White House during GWB's tenure. I think the reason Gonzalez is still there is because he knows too much and ditto for Karl Rove.

C A, Tuscaloosa -- you say everyone was in favor of taking out Saddam. Great if you have a magic wand. Ask those people if it is OK for 300,000 innocent people and 3000 American soldiers to die to achieve taking out Saddam and you might get a different answer.

Joe, Waco you have a lot of nerve calling other people stupid if you really think that we could have won the Vietnam war if only the military had a free hand. That is one of the biggest BS lies the wingnuts like to throw around. I can hear those wingnuts 20 years from now telling themselves the same fantasy about Iraq. Were you alive and aware what went down in Vietnam. Did you know that Richard Nixon was re-elected because he had a secret plan to end the war. He was not exactly a pacifist. He turned loose the military. Hanoi, a civilian target, was subjected to masssive bombing resulting in thousands of civilian deaths to break the will of North Vietnam -- did it work -- no. He bombed and invaded Cambodia to attack the secret Viet Cong bases to wipe them out -- did it work -- no. But he did cause Cambodia to fall into kaos and be taken over by the Khmer Rouge resulting in the killing fields and the deaths of over 400,000 innocents. We defoliated 25% of the country and children are being born today with birth defects as a result. We dropped millions of land mines and children are still losing legs today. Exactly what do you think the military should have done next to win in Viet Nam? Kill everyone and let God sort it out? Would we have then achieved our goal of bringing peace and freedom to those people? They are living their lives out in relative peace and tranquility today BECAUSE we left. I shudder to think what hell would be continuing if we were still there. There are some really callous, sick, insane people running our government right now and if those are the ones you want removed then great.

Hey Scott...I badger you quite a bit...and we probably agree to disagree, but your post about your theory makes sense...but I would still argue that al Qaeda is still based in Pakistan and Afghanistan...buried in the desolate mountains in both countries...yes, there are some al Qaeda in Iraq, but overall the Sunnis just want to be back in control in Iraq...all Sunnis are not al Qaeda....Saddam wasn't never al Qaeda, nor his followers...and Iran backs the Shiite and the civil war and ethnic battle continues in Iraq with our soldiers in the middle...but I agree with most of your theory...except that the insurgents in Iraq will bomb us...the majority of the Shiite and Sunni in Iraq don't want to attack America...they are simply battling for control of Iraq...the Taliban has sleeper cells around the world who want to harm the USA...they are who we should be going after...not fighting a civil war in Iraq...but we will probably always disagree about that...

It also has become quite clear to me that after the Paul O'Neil book and the Richard Clarke tell-all Bush and Company couldn't have another damaging tome being written by another insider. The solution? Give everyone connected with Iraq policy decisions The Presidential Medal Of Freedom thereby buying their silence. It's clear that it worked quite well with George Tenet.

Ghezzzz Russell: I said that most (NOT ALL) wanted to take out Saddam and supported this administration in the invasion to the tune of over 70% of the American population when this first started. I did not say that the death of all the Iraqis or Americans was worth it. In fact, I found myself in the smaller percentage who was against going into Iraq in the first place, and once the Iraqi army was demolished in about 2 - 3 weeks I was for coming home immediately afterwards. The majority now supports bringing the troops home, but the majority supported this administration when they first invaded Iraq. The majority has a right to want Bush out of there now because he is one of the few now that will not admit it was all a mistake. Make more sense Russell? Give me a break.

Bobby-Sacramento: I has been a pleasure Bobby. Hate to see you leave. You have been an interesting read and I thoroughly enjoyed conversing with you. I can see you are a special guy Bobby, and I wish you all the best. Thanks for the concern for the boys, but I can assure you, they can handle themselves, and if something were to happen they have done their duty, eventual withdrawal or not, and they know this. Thanks again Bobby.

Sorry C A, you deserve a break. I got carried away.

Keith--Read anything Antonia Juhasz has written for the real information these guys didn't divulge way back then. Some of us knew it, but we are only citizens.

I find it very interesting yhat Senators Edwards and Feinstien voted for the war while they both knew that Bush had lied to them. I think Senator Edwards has some explaining to do.

Unlike George Tenet, Colin Powell DID voice his disagreements with the Bush administration. His mistake was to believe what was handed to him and not question it. Maybe he was too decent to realize a president and vice-president would do such a vile thing to our country and its army as to lie about going to war TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE. Presidents have lied about going to war before, but their Secretaries of State wouldn't be kept in the dark about the lie. He resigned later, after strongly voicing his opposition to various Bush statements about the war. I think he hated having been hoodwinked. Unlike George Tenet, Senator Durbin spoke out loudly against going to war. He and those who voted against it were villified by all the "patriots." I think the members of the intelligence committee who saw for sure the difference in their intelligence and the "intelligence" Bush and Cheney had, should not have had to keep this to themselves. Their oath meant something to them, but at what cost? Tenet knew the intelligence was flawed, said nothing on the contrary, accepted the medal of freedom, and four and a half years later complains about how HE was used. He comes clean just as his book is hitting the shelves. There are differences in these men and their motives.

This topic is probably nearing the end of it's life span but... one more time - WHERE WAS THE MEDIA? One of the most shameles things I saw this year was David Gregory DANCING on stage with Karl Rove at that dinner. There is simply no place for this kind of entertainment. The press needs to be independent and objective and when you dance on stage, sip martinis, and ride on the same planes with each other you cannot be objective. Same holds true for the NEWSWEEK / MSNBC marriage (the Imus assasination by both is evidnece) as well as the CNN / USA TODAY / TIME lose affiliation. The print media needs to COVER the electronic media. How can Jon Meachem and Howard Fineman be anywhere close to objective when they are in bed with Steve Capus? My guess is Capus got an advance copy of Meacheman's shameful column about Imus. Thank God for XM Radio where I can get REAL news from the BBC and I can also listen to informative and funny programs that do not have the muzzle of censorship. Strange and dangerous time we live in. have a good week all!

Repeat of post to Johnson's letter entry: Unless I missed it, none of us called for boycotting this book. I say that unless/until Mr. Tenet sets up a donation to the vets as suggested by Mr. Johnson, I say this book should rot on the shelves. Get the word out!!

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):