Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Powell Says C.I.A. Was Misled About Weapons

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 12:37 AM
Original message
Powell Says C.I.A. Was Misled About Weapons
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said for the first time on Sunday that he now believes that the Central Intelligence Agency was deliberately misled about evidence that Saddam Hussein was developing unconventional weapons.

He also said, in his comments on the NBC News program "Meet the Press," that he regrets citing evidence that Iraq had mobile biological laboratories in his presentation to the United Nations on Feb. 5, 2003.

But on Sunday, Mr. Powell argued that the C.I.A. itself was misled, and that in turn he was, too. "Unfortunately, that multiple sourcing over time has turned out not to be accurate," Mr. Powell said, going farther than he did on April 2 when he conceded that the intelligence was not "that solid."

On Sunday, Mr. Powell hinted at widespread reports of fabrications by an engineer who provided much of the most critical information about the labs. Intelligence officials have since found that the engineer was linked to the Iraqi National Congress, an exile group that was pressing President Bush to unseat Mr. Hussein.
Basically, Powell now believes that the Iraqis had chemical weapons, and that was it," said an official close to him. "And he is out there publicly saying this now because he doesn't want a legacy as the man who made up stories to provide the president with cover to go to war."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/17/international/middleeast/17POWE.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. Why is he saying this now?
Most people already know the info was bogus and who gave it to them. He hasn't added anything to the collective store of knowledge except that he's a little slow on the uptake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 12:45 AM
Response to Original message
2. So the f***ing murderer is worried about his legacy?!?!?!
Yeah, sure would hate for YOU to get stained by all that blood, colin. Not like you helped make the damn thing happen or anything.

You should have made SURE before you let the blood-gates open, you slimy war pig. Screw you and your legacy.

You=bush=cheney=LIARS.

Where the hell do these cowarldy f***s think they are, anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. I agree with your outrage.
The Bush administration did not supply one credible piece of evidence regarding WMDs in Iraq. Powell lied boldly before the world and now expects us to believe he was deceived. I was not deceived by his diplomatic theatrics then, I am not deceived by them now. I do not trust a single word issuing from his mouth. I'm even skeptical of this whole 'reality moment' on MTP. What a politician has to do to get attention these days! :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacifictiger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. I think he is perhaps pointing to
Cheney's pet crook, Chalabi, and his cohorts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
4. People with true integrity

would resign after discovey that they had been used in this way.

Why haven't YOU resigned Mr. Powell?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andy_Stephenson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. Because he has no...
integrity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
5. The Question is: Are Chalabi &the engineer being tried for treason?
exactly who is going to take responsibility for getting the USA
into a war on false pretenses?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maggrwaggr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
7. Powell is admitting the war was based on lies?
Verrrry interesting.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
8. Powell's In A Strange Warp...
Try and imagine this...in the insane world that is the BFEE regime, Powell now looks like its salvation...the man who can straighten things up and for some goofy reason, he's buying into this image.

Lately his two biggest nemesis in the government, Rummy & Unka Dick have been taking a beating, and methinks Colin isn't the least bit sad about this...he's got some scores to settle. The WMD mess is one of them.

Of course Powell knew the intel was bogus. He didn't have to go any further than that U.N. Security Council chamber that day and ask Hans Blix about it. He had Joe Wilson's report that refuted the Yellowcake crap that was uttered, deliberately to mislead, a few days earlier in Bunnypant's SOTU. Plus he had to know how gung-ho the PNAC'ers were and that either he could quit or get with the program. We know what he did.

Now with those Chickenhawks in retreat, somehow Powell is being turned to as "The Adult" here. Notice, not any other regime mouthpiece was on the chat circuit this weekend. It's all Colin and the hope he still had the credibility others in this regime had lost.

I had respect for the man...thinking he'd be that safety valve to keep this regime from messing up our foreign policy too bad, but I was sadly wrong. Not only is there the blood of Iraqis and others on this man's hands, but also the disgrace of letting so many Americans down in selling his soul to this evil regime. He's truly one of this regime's most tragic figures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
9. ordinary people were able to figure out that it's bogus to play
Ordinary people were able to figure out that it's bogus to play a tape of people saying

"quick, hide the weapons!"

without saying when, where, or how the tape was made, as Powell did.

I don't believe that Powell believed the evidence was solid he showed the UN that day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 02:24 AM
Response to Original message
10. Please please read Professor Glen Rangwala's response last year
Edited on Mon May-17-04 02:29 AM by oblivious
Just to make sure everyone knows the truth about this Powell character, please read Prof Rangwala's response to the 44 points in Powell's dispicable speech to the UN.

Prof. Rangwala is the man who exposed Blair's intelligence dossier as the 10-year old Master's thesis. He exposed every single one of Powell's arguments as a fraud well before the war started.

http://www.traprockpeace.org/firstresponse.html

If he really believed what he was saying, he the most gullible, most uninformed statesman on earth. Has he no shame?

Never stop reminding the press and the world of his shame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Also contrast his 2003 speech with his 2001 position on Iraq
Edited on Mon May-17-04 02:32 AM by oblivious
Press Remarks with Foreign Minister of Egypt Amre Moussa
Secretary Colin L. Powell
Cairo, Egypt (Ittihadiya Palace)
February 24, 2001

"...the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place, but we are always willing to review them to make sure that they are being carried out in a way that does not affect the Iraqi people but does affect the Iraqi regime's ambitions and the ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and we had a good conversation on this issue."

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 02:42 AM
Response to Original message
13. they must have outsourced their sourcing
when shopping for rationales for war, it pays to look for the union label.
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 Thu May 09th 2024, 06:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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