Journalism won’t die if you donate. Support Voice of San Diego today!

Reader Judy wrote:

Sneaking Blackwater mercenaries into our backyard is a symptom of a larger problem – the privatization/corpor of the military. Thank goodness for citizens like you, Ray, who paid attention and continue to bring this backroom deal out into the open! Thanks, and keep educating our fellow citizens.

Reader Mike wrote:

Judy — Blackwater is not seeking to sneak anyone into your backyard. So much nonsense in the public domain about Blackwater has led people like you to be completely uninformed about what the company actually does. It is and always has been a training company. It trains police and military; and thank God. I can’t imagine even Blackwater’s adversaries claiming that police and military should not be well-trained. And, Ray, A community planning group SHOULD see financial incentives. Money helps communities and when Blackwater paid tax dollars filter in and Potrero can apply them to bettering the community, I highly doubt that anyone will argue with the group’s decision to support a project that provides the community with economic opportunity.

Blackwater has “Black ops” contracts that are not available for public review. The question you have to ask yourself is why our police and military suddenly have insufficient training facilities. Then, why is Blackwater offering to hire ex-military for their own army (for hire)?

Reader Bob wrote:

You posting is full of innuendo and twisted distortions of the facts. While I may agree with you about the merits of the blackwater project the way you present this information makes it nearly impossible to understand fact from fiction. The re-engineering process at County DPLU will NOT limit public comment and is NOT fast tracking. The intention is to reduce the time it takes to accomplish tasks internally at the county. Also- You speak as if the Supervisors have a choice about if they can comment on pending projects but later admit there is indeed law that prevents them from doing so. Don’t blame them, talk to the legislature. Next time, let’s have a little more fact and less hyperbole.

BPR is intended to shorten the time to process an application. That’s why it’s called fast-tracking. If you process an application faster, you will naturally limit the time available for public scrutiny. That’s a simple fact, and so my comments stand.

Just because there is a law that says that no one can talk about something, does that mean it is a law that we should keep? I would say that our constitution allows for freedom of speech, and to say otherwise is contrary to the intentions of our founding fathers. Why is it that the developers get to put a muzzle over the mouths of the public? Not a good idea, I would say. I think freedom of speech is far too important to allow the developers to trample on our rights. So, regardless of the “law,” I don’t think it is right.


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.