Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Powell's top aid apologizes for the Iraqi war LIES

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 05:20 AM
Original message
Powell's top aid apologizes for the Iraqi war LIES
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Powells_former_chief_of_staff_on_0205.html



<In an interview that aired on PBS on Friday, Feb. 3, Colin Powell's former chief of staff claimed that the speech Powell made before the United Nations on Feb. 5, 2003, laying out a case for war with Iraq, included falsehoods of which Powell had never been made aware. He said, "My participation in that presentation at the UN constitutes the lowest point in my professional life. I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council.">

Now can we get out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Surya Gayatri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 05:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, thanks a bunch

for that self-interested 'mea culpa', Wilkerson. Will it be enough to keep

your sorry treasonous butt out of an eventual war-crimes trial? I for one

hope not. SG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. That's what they're wanting
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 07:03 AM by FreedomAngel82
They think if they apologize it'll be enough and we can "forgive and forget." Ha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Surya Gayatri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Yes, and he's been pushed to the forefront

to take the heat off his former boss and the BFEE regime. Catapulting the

usual propaganda that it was merely a problem of faulty intelligence.


SG :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:27 AM
Response to Original message
2. I always wonder how WE out here could be well aware of all the
falsehoods, but those in the inner circle weren't -- that's not possible. And if all this stuff was lies, how come Powell isn't up there with you? Is he still so cowardly he sent you to apologize?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jazzjunkysue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. If I knew about PNAC, then everyone in the white house knew.
And we know their plans went all the way back to '97:

http://newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

January 26, 1998
The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC
Dear Mr. President:
We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.
The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.
Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.
Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.
We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.
Sincerely,
Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. They all came from or were connected to PNAC
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 07:05 AM by FreedomAngel82
Everyone of them is there for a purpose. He and Powell were probably advised to do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. They knew damn well
I remember on Bernie Wards program last year they had the guy who wrote "Losing Iraq" on and he told how Powell had a 1,000 page document on everything that is happening now and he knew this ALL would happen. So they knew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:32 AM
Response to Original message
3. And I quote.....
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/060403B.shtml


Friday 30 May 2003

US News and World Report magazine said the first draft of the speech was prepared for Powell by Vice President Richard Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in late January.

According to the report, the draft contained such questionable material that Powell lost his temper, throwing several pages in the air and declaring, "I'm not reading this. This is bullshit."

Cheney's aides wanted Powell to include in his presentation information that Iraq has purchased computer software that would allow it to plan an attack on the United States, an allegation that was not supported by the CIA, US News reported.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:47 AM
Response to Original message
4. So when did he supposedly figure out that he & Powell had been HAD?
What was the eye opener and was it before or after the 2004 election?

(Bolding mine)
Wilkerson stood strongly by his earlier description of Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld as having formed a cabal to hijack the decision-making process, emphasizing both their determination to ignore the Geneva Conventions and the "inept and incompetent" planning for post-invasion Iraq. And he concluded, "I'm worried and I would rather have the discussion and debate in the process we've designed than I would a dictate from a dumb strongman. . . . I'd prefer to see the squabble of democracy to the efficiency of dictators."


The above paragraph and the one preceding it doesn't surprise me nor many here I suspect.

btw - The last part I bolded feels so familiar but nothing turned up in a Google search... does anyone know off hand is it a take off of someone elses quote or is it actually original to him? It reads like a sig line quote. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. I don't buy that Powell...
didn't know that the whole speech he delivered to the UN was all BULLSHIT. Powell had the chance to be a man of integrity but he chose to be a pawn to the Neo Fascists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formactv Donating Member (247 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. That is all he has ever been.
We just wanted him to be a hero.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. Ding ding ding!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:03 AM
Response to Original message
8. Too little too late
So many lives lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 07:31 AM
Response to Original message
14. "...but it wasn't my fault"
Nice touch...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
15. Too fuckin late...fake mea culpa, fake sorriness, fake BS...hide this mans
head in SHAME...banish them(Powell) to TUVA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
16. I suspect this is all so much sour grapes....
There was a fluff piece about him in the WAPO recently, and he said that he and Powell are no longer close because of his recent statements. I wonder about that, I think he's agreed to take the bullet and go out as Powell's attack dog to get back at the administration for it's treatment of him, letting him take the fall at the UN, etc. There's probably alot more to the story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC