Another Iraq Memo Revealed: Colin Powell Opposed War Without Second U.N. Resolution
Another Iraq Memo Revealed: Colin Powell Opposed War Without Second U.N. Resolution
The New York Times reported yesterday on a confidential January 2003 memo that showed President Bush “was determined to invade Iraq” even without a second UN resolution. Yesterday on Hardball, the source of that memo, British scholar Philippe Sands, revealed the existence of yet another revealing pre-war memo:
SANDS: Another memo which records a conversation between Colin Powell and his counterpart in the United Kingdom, Jack Straw, which makes it clear that in Colin Powell’s eyes if there wasn’t enough evidence for a second Security Council resolution, then there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the U.S. going it alone.
As Tiny Revolution notes, a May 2003 UK Guardian article reported on a transcript of a meeting between Powell and Straw in which the two discussed their doubts that WMDs existed in Iraq. The paper later agreed to retract portions of the story after Straw “made it clear that no such meeting took place.” It seems the Guardian was right after all.
Full transcript below:
SANDS: Well, there’s now no shred of doubt and there’s been no denial, you will have noticed, as to the contents of the memorandum that the decision was indeed taken in January before Colin Powell went.
In fact, one other aspect that I’ve described in my book, “Lawless World” that hasn’t emerged so much in the New York Times memo is another memo which records a conversation between Colin Powell and his counterpart in the United Kingdom, Jack Straw, which makes it clear that in Colin Powell’s eyes if there wasn’t enough evidence for a second Security Council resolution, then there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the U.S. going it alone.
So Colin Powell was spot on, but it seems he was overridden by a president and others in the administration who were absolutely committed to taking the United States to war, tragically in erroneous circumstances, irrespective of what the inspectors found.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
damn them all tohell
March 28th, 2006 at 4:36 pmpowell shoulda fucking quit.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:37 pmSo what is it going to take to impeach the bastard?
March 28th, 2006 at 4:38 pmPowell the lap dog. Too bad for him.
As for this administration, the more we learn, the longer their incarceration should be.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:44 pmThats his right.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:46 pmTP, Philippe Sands is much more than an author. He is one of the leading experts in International Law – in his first book, he debunked the legal basis on which Bush and Blair went to war; in this follow-up, he is busy proving that Bush and Blair also acted in bad faith.
So what I am saying, is don’t sell Sands short. He is no drive-by self-publicist, he is a serious scholar and an impeccably credentialed lawyer. Unlike the screech monkeys who will inevitably be smearing him.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:47 pmF*** Colin Powell. He too willingly went along when all this was happening and didn’t say anything. Let him rot in hell with the rest of the GOP.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:58 pmA Discerning person could always tell that Colin Powell was intellectually and morally superior to the rest of the Bush administration. I believe this statement makes abundantly clear why Mr. Powell is no longer in the Bush administration.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:59 pmIf he was morally superior he would have come forward before the war began, I realize that he would have been torn apart by the right wing attack machine, but at least he would have his dignity.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:09 pmWhere the hell were all these memos, investigative reporting, confessions, and scrutiny when we were marching in the streets protesting this war three years ago?
100,000 dead Iraqis really don’t give a shit about secret memos; from the response with which they are being received, Americans don’t either, unless they are going to be used as evidence in an impeachment hearing.
Listening to Rumsfeld during his press briefing today, it was clearly evident that his mendacity is still as thick as as the blood in the streets of Baghdad. He shamelessly used 9/11 to begin the pompous prevarication, kneeling at the alter of Mors; the perfidy of men.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:09 pmi will never forget watching meet the press when they were interviewing him while he was at some foreign location and one of his aids slapped the camera away when they didnt like the question and he told them to straighten it out-classic
March 28th, 2006 at 5:10 pmWhile I believe Mr. Powell may have been given false information by bush/cheney, even he had doubts. My respect for Mr. Powell vanished when he made the presentation to the UN. If he had spent 10 minutes calling the UN inspectors to ask about the validity of the US position he would have never compromised his good name.
I believe he knows more, but is not going to cause problems for bush/cheney. If this eventually turns out to be the true, his name will forever be identified as someone who was willing to give up his personal values for political gain, certainly not the first, but never has it cost so much.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:15 pmColin Powell is disgraced both for his role in Iran/Contra and Iraq. Any morality he once possessed was long ago subsumed by his political ambition. History will not be kind to him.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:16 pmIf indeed Colin Powell were intellectually and morally superior to the rest of the Bush administration, he would have stood up BEFORE GOD AND COUNTRY and denounced the actions of the Bush administration. The fact that he carried water for Bush at all proves that Mr. Powell is as intellectually and morally inferior as Bush and his band of goons. Powell is a disgrace to himself, his family, his country, the world and God. He may have quit the Bush administration, but he’ll be joining all of them again in hell.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:22 pmI used to respect Colin Powell. But now? No way!
What will it take for the people to rise up and throw these fools from office?
ITMFA now!
March 28th, 2006 at 5:22 pmOf course he did. People who’ve seen war aren’t hungho about returning without a viable cause. And oil is not a viable cause.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:28 pmTime magazine, Special Issue, March 31, 2003
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,1101030331,00.html
Article, “First Stop, Iraq”, starts out, “F___ Saddam. we’re taking him out.” Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.”
Some other snippets, “The U.S., neoconservatives believe, is unique in its power and its principles. It cannot allow its mission to be tied down by international agreements that diminish its freedom of action. At the sam time, neoconservatives insist that theirs is a generous and international vision; other nations, other peoples, will willingly support U.S. policies.”
“Of the 18 signatories (of PNAC), eight now hold senior positions in the Bush administration”
“Again, no evidence was found linking Saddam to the attacks”
“At one point that spring, a senior White House official said in exasperation, ‘The dirty little secret of Iraq is that there is no plan’.”
“The unanswered question of the Iraq atory is whether the ideas behind it will one day be used in other places, too. “
“Cheney pushed back. Without informating Powell, he decided that his speech to the V.F.W. convention in Nashville would set out the hard-line case against Saddam.”
It is very clear that Bush had no interest in foreign policy, Cheney, Rumfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle were on one side and Powell was on the other. As Powell was presenting to the UN, the others were getting to Bush’s ear. And by the Spring of 2002, Bush saw the only solution to be war by any means. The neocon’s knew one solution, went to great lengths to deceive, manipulate, and attack decent. What I don’t understand, if it was so right, why all the unethical shenanigans?
There’s an interesting article that asks are we seeing a repeat with Iran, “No one’s laughing at this deja vu all over again”.
“According to The Irish Times, (Denis Staunton, March 17, p. 10) a poll by the Pew Research Center asked U.S. respondents to suggest one word that described the president. Up to this time, the word most commonly chosen has been “honest.†In this poll, “the single characteristic most closely associated with Mr. Bush in the current poll is ‘incompetent.’â€
But I don’t know. When it takes six years of international bungling to change people’s perceptions of current policies, you have to wonder, don’t you, who’s really been incompetent and who’s really been clever?
Our one best hope may lie in soon being able to answer that question.”
http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/fwis/
March 28th, 2006 at 5:31 pmIntellectually superior, yes. Morally superior, I used to think so, but after that UN performance, he became another McCain to me (read, sell-out). What I still cant understand is what he thought he would get out of it by going against his gut, his intellect, and his supposed morals, by tagging along on this misadventure. Had he quit then, no way we would have gone to war. Then he could be remembered as a real man. Now, he is just a patsy, and has taken all the respect he garnered previously and chucked it in the toilet. And for what???? Do you really think he still has political ambitions? Sure doesnt look like. What the fuck did he go along with those morons for??? Even if he tries to make a political move now, he has nothing like the support he used to have. Plus, hes got 10s of thousands of iraqis blood on his hands now. He alone could have stopped it, and didnt. A true modern day tragedy. Why has he sat silently and not repented for his stupidity? Why not speak out now and say, I was wrong, I should have been more forceful, you were all lied to. Isnt his honor worth more to him than anything else at this point? What is it they can take from him – man, there must be some real dirt on the dude to be sitting and taking it like this. Geez…
March 28th, 2006 at 5:32 pmUnbeliever – In your world, oil is NOT a “viable cause”. But in the REAL world, oil is the fuel of the international and domestic engine that transports goods and services, heats homes, casts light, etc. If the world oil supply was cut dramatically, what would YOU suggest be done with people whose jobs and livelihoods would be lost, houses that would no be homes, and a depression that would make the 1930’s look like a cake-walk?? When the “sentimental idealists” wake up to the stark realities of contemporary life, they might realize that oil is a vital national INTEREST. As I have said before, I look forward to the day when we can wean ourselves from the oil spigot of the Middle East, use renewable agricultural resources to fuel our national engine and wave goodbye to Arabs on their camels. (But then the lefty progs will be whining and moaning (more!) about agribusiness – and that damn George Bush with all his farming friends.)
March 28th, 2006 at 5:43 pmoil is a vital national INTEREST.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — March 28, 2006 @ 5:43 pm
thank you, you are the first wrongy to admit what this war is about. Many of us “lefty progs” including me have suggested that we move away from oil as our main energy source. to be honest I have never found anyone who disagrees with the idea of using agricultural, or other forms of energy. However at the rate were going, we will never ween ourselves off of oil unless we there is a crisis of biblical proportions. As for the jobs lost, they may need some training, but I am sure we can find something in the alternative energy fields. Your arguments like your mind are weak as usual.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:54 pmGeoff~
Many of us wonder how so many can have such a small conscience. Too many politicians are compromised by money, power and misplaced loyalty. In Powell’s case, it could very well be, that the unwarranted N.S.A. wiretaps have something on him. This could be said for many other people in power, who vascilate between right and wrong…and, eventually cave-in to wrong/right. Blackmail? Well, ya never know how well N.S.A, wiretaps are really doin’, do ya?
March 28th, 2006 at 5:54 pmWe import 12 bbl of oil a day. Approximately 1000MW of power can be produced from 40,000 bbl oil per day. Wind costs $1Million per 1MW of power, so a 1000 MWh would be $1billion dollars. We’ve spent approximately 250Bln on the Iraq war, which is approaching 250 MWh 83% of the costs that would have been necessary to provide the US with complete energy independence.
This assumes current technology, current prices of wind facilities, and no economy of scale or even cheaper energy sources which are possible. We’re not even talking biodiesel, bioethanol or other solutions which already provide a less expensive alternative to gasoline.
In reality, the Iraq war for ‘oil’ and ‘peace’ was a giant boondoggle, and a waste of taxpayer money.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:55 pm“When the “sentimental idealists†wake up to the stark realities of contemporary life, they might realize that oil is a vital national INTEREST. mighty moron”
Only among those who wish to keep it so. The vital interest is energy independence, and oil prevents that from happening. If there’s a vital american interest, it’s to keep oil companies and their servants (you) out of politics long enough to fix this mess you’ve created.
And see my calculations above in the previous post – please review them and comment on them if you must. I know you have trouble with basic math, so I’m not expecting much from you mighty moron.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:57 pmI see the right-wing Chris Matthews and Hardball is up to its Bush-cheerleading again.
Oh, wait.
March 28th, 2006 at 5:58 pm(But then the lefty progs will be whining and moaning (more!) about agribusiness – and that damn George Bush with all his farming friends.)
Comment by mighty aphrodite — March 28, 2006 @ 5:43 pm
Can you re-type that in English? I couldn’t get past the first sentance without losing complete interest in anything else that you had to say because it’s too painful to read your incoherent babble.
Ryan, I’d be happy to donate a dicationary to him if you can find the federal prison from which he types…
March 28th, 2006 at 6:01 pmOh, and before I forget: release the documents. I don’t take anyone’s word for anything, let’s see the documents and see what the entire context shows, not what journalists feel like cherry-picking.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:01 pm1. Who cares if Colin Powell was “spot on” about anything? When he realized Georgie was going to war no matter what anyone said or did, did he resign immediately in protest? No he did not.
2. Look at that transcript! I’m amazed Tweety let Sands speak so long without interrupting him.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:02 pmZookeeper,
That’s because you’re an idiot who believed ThinkProgress, DailyKos, MediaMatters and the rest of the liars who claimed that Matthews is a Bushie.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:03 pm“Oh, and before I forget: release the documents. I don’t take anyone’s word for anything – Comment by Seixon”
Except bush, who you apparently never distrust.
“That’s because you’re an idiot who believed ThinkProgress, DailyKos, MediaMatters and the rest of the liars who claimed that Matthews is a Bushie. Comment by Seixon ”
Yeah, never let the ‘facts’ get in the way of your opinion Seixon. You exhibit the typical fascist response – ignore the facts, and substitute your ‘feelings’.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:06 pmthat’s why he’s no longer in the cabinet…
March 28th, 2006 at 6:07 pm” see what the entire context shows, not what journalists feel like cherry-picking.
Comment by Seixon ”
I’ve seen your posts – stop projecting your own retarded propagandist tactics on others – it’s gross, just like you.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:07 pmWell, at least might aphrodite is willing to admit what the Bush administration won’t. We are there for oil. Isn’t it amazing that a girl has bigger balls than the President of the United States.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:07 pmHow am I supposed to know what Bush said if I can’t see the documents? Bush hasn’t commented on this, so how am I believing what he said? Geez. You have no problems believing journalists who don’t show their evidence, I guess.
Ryan Neat, the “facts” which you speak of are demonstrated in this very post on ThinkProgress. Chris Matthews let’s people come on his show and speak up against the administration, and he holds the view himself that the administration is filled with liars. That’s what the “facts” are. You’d think that you might pick up on it at some point, but you forget all about them when ThinkProgress tells you the opposite.
As for calling me a fascist: classic. You’re definition of fascist described yourself: you’re the one ignoring the facts, the very ones demonstrated in this post, and substituting your feelings, your hatred of the Bush administration.
You’re a partisan goon, Ryan, and everyone knows it. You project and ignore the truth on a continual basis. Projecting this onto everyone else doesn’t help.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:10 pmhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html
March 28th, 2006 at 6:11 pm…
U.S Crude Oil Imports …………………… 10,088,000 barrels/day
U.S. Crude Oil Imports from OPEC ……. 5,042,000 barrels/day
Top U.S.Oil Supplier ………………………..Canada – 1,616,000 barrels/day
U.S. Petroleum Product Imports ………. 3,057,000 barrels/day
U.S. Petroleum Product Imports from OPEC .. 659,000 barrels/day
U.S. Net Petroleum Imports …………….. 12,097,000 barrels/day
Top U.S. Total Petroleum Supplier …….. Canada – 2,138,000 barrels/day
…
iraqi oil is NOT a viable cause for all this death and destruction…
I see, so I make a call to see the documents, and Ryan Neat calls me a fascist, retarded, and gross. Don’t you ever get ashamed of your actions Ryan?
March 28th, 2006 at 6:12 pmTo think that this misadventure had any justification OTHER than oil is to simply dismiss all the recent history of the region. It is so clearly about oil that it is a wonder it has gone this long with but a few voices (such as the Ted Koppel contributing article to the NYTimes) proclaiming it loudly and clearly. The sad thing is that we have made little to no progress on weening ourselves from this need, and thus the national interest persists, much longer than it needs to. The progress that has been made has come in the face of opposition to it from the administration, members of which clearly benefit from the status quo (bush and oil buddies) as well as the maintenance of the status quo (cheney, halliburton, carlyle and other defense related people). Why would we want to do something that could lessen our need for oil and for militarly power to secure it? Lunacy! If any of you arent yet willing to concede this point, go back over the history of the US involvement in the persian gulf over the past three decades and marvel at how clear it all becomes.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:14 pm“As for calling me a fascist: classic. You’re definition of fascist described yourself: you’re the one ignoring the facts, the very ones demonstrated in this post, and substituting your feelings, your hatred of the Bush administration. Seixon”
Fascism is a rightwing political movement that seeks to align government, military, corporate and religious conservatives into a cohesive system, and to suppress free speech, the media and dissent. That pretty much sums up your attitudes.
“You’re a partisan goon, Ryan, and everyone knows it. You project and ignore the truth on a continual basis. Projecting this onto everyone else doesn’t help. Comment by Seixon”
Hehe, really? Is that why I debunk all of your CRAP with actual links, and reference materials?
You’re a fool who accuses others of his own heinous acts. Get a life you retarded babboon.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:16 pmPowell obviously either had a “deal” with Bush or he was blackmailed into that embarrassing speech at the UN as well as going along with the war.
Either way, he showed a remarkable lack of candor if he was really against the war without a second UN resolution.
Lump him and McCain in the same traitor boat and send them and the whole Bush crime gang anywhere but here!
March 28th, 2006 at 6:16 pmKaty, wake up and smell the economics 101 lesson. It doesnt matter that WE dont get most of our oil from that region, its that the region is a global supplier. If that supply is diminished, what is left will go up up up in price, including what we pay for ours from Canada. We’d be screwed all the same…doesnt matter who loses their direct supplier. They will still want oil since their is no quick switchover to another energy source, and they will bid on whatever is available to get it.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:17 pm“I see, so I make a call to see the documents, and Ryan Neat calls me a fascist, retarded, and gross. Don’t you ever get ashamed of your actions Ryan? Comment by Seixon”
Seeing the documents hasn’t forced you to recognize the truth or retreat from your partisan hackery before – why should it be different this time?
As for being ashamed of my actions, it was YOUR party that trained, funded and recruited the members of Al Queda for your dirty war in Afghanistan. And it was your side that kidnapped, tortured and even murdered captives under your control. I have nothing to be ashamed of – you by contrast are just another Eichman who has LOTS to apologize for, and little courage or responsibility to do so.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:18 pmFor our edifictation Seixon here is the link to the times article.
and it is worse then just the snippets Ryan placed at the top.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/24/timep.saddam.tm/
March 28th, 2006 at 6:19 pm“Chris Matthews let’s people come on his show and speak up against the administration, and he holds the view himself that the administration is filled with liars. That’s what the “facts†are. Seixon”
That doesn’t make him a liberal, just a journalist, and he has almost 2x as many conservatives on his show than he does liberals. Plus, this administration has PROVEN to be liars – it’s no great mystery to anyone but someone as stupid as you are.
And Matthews is a conservative BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, and presents much more pro-bush than anti-bush rhetoric. In the world of a FASCIST (eg. you), anyone that presents any dissent is a liberal – it’s all relative isn’t it butthead?
March 28th, 2006 at 6:21 pmbe nice, geoff…thanks for the lesson…already undersood…
March 28th, 2006 at 6:22 pmi was addressing this @20 – “I look forward to the day when we can wean ourselves from the oil spigot of the Middle East…”
However, Katy, I will agree on one point…. Iraq should not have been attacked to secure something that was already mostly secure. If oil reflected the true cost of our military action, and the cost of all the lives lost, it would be about $400 a barrel and we’d have been sunk a long time ago. I in no way agree with the decision to undertake this war, the reasoning behind it, or the lies that have continued to support it. However, if it had been shown at the time, much as it had during the 91 gulf war, that the oil was at risk, then Id probably have supported military intervention to keep it flowing. The sad thing is that this WAS the reason for war, and yet theyve trotted out every other reason they could BUT the real reason in order to carry out their premeditated plans. A smarter strategy would have been in place since the last oil shock, where we gradually move away from imported oil as the lifeblood of our eceonomy. But that takes long range thinking, sacrifice, and belief in things that this administration clearly has nothing to do with.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:22 pmHello Ryan,
Couple questions for you, I’m not really following where you were going with the oil import post.
We import 12bbl of oil a day
Ok, Following to get 1000MW it would take 3333 days?
Approximately 1000MW of power can be produced from 40,000 bbl oil per day.
OK, but we only import 12bbl a day, Following to get 1000MW it would take 3333 days at our current oil import?
Wind costs $1Million per 1MW of power, so a 1000 MWh would be $1billion dollars
Okie, following again
We’ve spent approximately 250Bln on the Iraq war, which is approaching 250 MWh
Okie
83% of the costs that would have been necessary to provide the US with complete energy independence.
How much energy is needed for complete independence?
Thanks!
March 28th, 2006 at 6:23 pmRyan Neat,
“Fascism is a rightwing political movement that seeks to align government, military, corporate and religious conservatives into a cohesive system, and to suppress free speech, the media and dissent. That pretty much sums up your attitudes.”
That’s hilarious. For one, I’m not religious. Two, I haven’t advocated any of the things you just said. Three, I am asking the media to GIVE ME MORE INFORMATION, not suppress them. LOL. You are too funny.
“Hehe, really? Is that why I debunk all of your CRAP with actual links, and reference materials?
You’re a fool who accuses others of his own heinous acts. Get a life you retarded babboon.”
When did you ever do such a thing? You never have, never will. You haven’t debunked anything I have said, you just keep calling me names and harassing me. So now I get to add “fool” and “babboon” to the list of names you have called me. You done name-calling yet?
“Seeing the documents hasn’t forced you to recognize the truth or retreat from your partisan hackery before – why should it be different this time?”
See that’s just the thing – I haven’t seen the documents. I’m asking to see them. As for talking about partisan hackery, there is pot and a kettle and something about calling someone something. Black, was it?
“As for being ashamed of my actions, it was YOUR party that trained, funded and recruited the members of Al Queda for your dirty war in Afghanistan. And it was your side that kidnapped, tortured and even murdered captives under your control. I have nothing to be ashamed of – you by contrast are just another Eichman who has LOTS to apologize for, and little courage or responsibility to do so.”
My party? I don’t have a party. Besides, it was Jimmy Carter who started funding the opposition forces in Afghanistan, so does that mean you are talking about the Democratic party? I thought it was the USSR that was fighting a dirty war in Afghanistan… Oh, and al Qaeda didn’t come into existence until the 1990s. Ah well, here I am talking facts to someone who clearly has no concept of what a “fact” is.
My side that kidnapped, tortured and murdered? Ehm, I’m in Lynndie England’s group in the military now? What the hell? Charles Graner and I are buddies, yeah, you got me there. Haha.
Eichmann, oh, that’s rich. Where’d you get that, Ward Churchill or something?
Even if I was guilty of everything you ascribe to me, does that still excuse your incessant name-calling?
“That doesn’t make him a liberal, just a journalist, and he has almost 2x as many conservatives on his show than he does liberals. Plus, this administration has PROVEN to be liars – it’s no great mystery to anyone but someone as stupid as you are.”
Did I say he was a liberal? He’s a Democrat. Obviously you fell for the Media Matters “study” that counted up guests instead of evaluating the content of the program. I gues it wouldn’t matter if Matthews had them on to bash them – you’d still think that Matthews is a conservative, simply because Media Matters told you to believe it. The truth, my dear sir, is quite different.
As for them being PROVEN to be liars, I sure haven’t seen you prove anything. Matthews’ show lies in order to make Bush and Cheney seem like liars. But why bother, you don’t care about the truth, you care only about the propaganda you gulp down from Media Matters and your home, ThinkProgress.
“And Matthews is a conservative BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, and presents much more pro-bush than anti-bush rhetoric. In the world of a FASCIST (eg. you), anyone that presents any dissent is a liberal – it’s all relative isn’t it butthead?”
You believed that? Haha. Presents much more pro-Bush than anti-Bush rhetoric? Yeah, when he called the president a liar, I was thinking “OMG Matthews totally loves Bush” too. Whatever.
I haven’t used the word liberal once, but here you seem to say that I have. That wouldn’t be a strawman argument, would it? No, never.
So now I can add butthead to the list of adorable names you have given me. It seems like you don’t have much to say since all you can do is call me names, ascribe beliefs to me that I don’t have, and assume that I am of a certain political party simply because I am too smart to be brainwashed by either side of the political spectrum.
Ryan, you are probably the most brainwashed person that ever commented on ThinkProgress. I’m also assuming that you are quite young. If not, I’d be ashamed if I were you.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:48 pmTundra, as I understand it, about 300MW of power equivalent is what we import. That’s the 12bbl / 40,000 per MWH to calculate the amount of power needed 300MW.
I just realize my calculations may be off, because a windmill tends to produce MWh per some fraction of 24 hours. While wind isn’t a 24 hour promise in most places, this still means the cost is probably less than I estimated. Does that make sense to you as well?
March 28th, 2006 at 6:51 pm“Ryan, you are probably the most brainwashed person that ever commented on ThinkProgress. I’m also assuming that you are quite young. If not, I’d be ashamed if I were you. Comment by Seixon”
You have such poor judgement and are such an idiot, I take that as a compliment.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:51 pm“Did I say he was a liberal? He’s a Democrat. Seixon”
Not true, he’s claimed the contrary in fact. Stupidity to a fault is your mantra, isn’t it?
March 28th, 2006 at 6:52 pm“Eichmann, oh, that’s rich. Where’d you get that, Ward Churchill or something? Seixon”
From the Nuremburg trials, where they put you pigs on a spit. Read something for a change instead of reichwing retard websites – you MIGHT learn something you fool.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:55 pmOK, Makes sense now, I just wasn’t sure where it was going. Got it now though.
Thanks!
March 28th, 2006 at 6:55 pm“That’s hilarious. For one, I’m not religious. Two, I haven’t advocated any of the things you just said. Three, I am asking the media to GIVE ME MORE INFORMATION, not suppress them. LOL. You are too funny. Seixon”
Yet you support the government that DOES stand for those things, and you criticize Matthews for having liberals (more information) on his show. That makes you a HYPOCRITE you RETARD. And I have no problem with wanting the memos released, that’s great – but you ignored all of the previous evidence, why would you miraculously have an open mind and start thinking for yourself. We both know your only goal is to find a way to ignore the evidence while you pretend otherwise, just as you’ve done allways.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:58 pmTundra,
Isn’t that just sad as can be? What a squandering of our national resources.
March 28th, 2006 at 6:59 pmRyan,
“You have such poor judgement and are such an idiot, I take that as a compliment.”
Poor judgment because? So idiot, another word I can add to the list. Sweet.
“Not true, he’s claimed the contrary in fact. Stupidity to a fault is your mantra, isn’t it?”
Yes, he’s claimed that he voted for Bush in 2000, I think. I’m not sure what that has to do with the current Chris Matthews. Or are you of the opinion that every Bush 2000 voter is still a Republican? I voted for Gore in 2000, and Nader in 2004. Pretty weird huh?
“From the Nuremburg trials, where they put you pigs on a spit. Read something for a change instead of reichwing retard websites – you MIGHT learn something you fool.”
Sorry, but I know that you have Eichmann from Ward Churchill. You don’t espouse the intellect to have known anything about world history. What is “you pigs” supposed to mean? Are you calling me a Nazi too? Wow, fresh. Liberals calling people fascists and Nazis. Never heard of that before!
March 28th, 2006 at 7:00 pm“Yet you support the government that DOES stand for those things, and you criticize Matthews for having liberals (more information) on his show. That makes you a HYPOCRITE you RETARD. And I have no problem with wanting the memos released, that’s great – but you ignored all of the previous evidence, why would you miraculously have an open mind and start thinking for yourself. We both know your only goal is to find a way to ignore the evidence while you pretend otherwise, just as you’ve done allways.”
If the Bush administration did stand for those things, you would never have heard any of this on Hardball, nor would you have read about it in the NY Times. Nor have they consolidated religion into the government, nor any of the other pillars of Fascism.
I support Bush on the war in Iraq, and would have done so whether it was Clinton, Gore, Bush I, Kerry, or anyone else.
Where did I criticize Matthews for having liberals on his show? I merely pointed it out to you, to debunk your hilarious belief that he leans right. How many more strawman arguments can you come up with?
So now I’m a hypocrit and retard once again. That list of names is getting pretty long Ryan…
You don’t want the documents to be released, you don’t care if they are or not, as you have already proven. You believe everything that you believe sheds negative light on Bush, no matter what it is, or who it is coming from.
I’m not ignoring anything. I know that Bush decided after Hans Blix reported to the UN on January 27, 2003 that Iraq had not cooperated fully that he no longer wanted to wait to take out Saddam Hussein. Iraq’s violation of Resolution 1441 was the straw that broke the camel’s back. So I’m not surprised that Bush, 4 days later, talked to Blair with the view that they were going to have to take Saddam out no matter what.
In fact, I always believed that to be the case. I knew that the breach of 1441 was what made Bush finally decide. I have argued that since the war began.
Of course, sites such as ThinkProgress have given the view that Bush wanted to invade Iraq even before he became president, which is false and not proven by any evidence.
Now you have moved the goal posts, and said that he intended to invade on January 31, 2003. No shit. Iraq violated 1441 by then. Get a clue already.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:06 pm#29 – Ok, just this once troll. Matthews is a hack. I don’t know if he’s a “Bushie” or not, we have never met, I can only go with what I see. He certainly does like the sound of his own voice. If you need documentation on that, go ahead and check out Media Matters.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:08 pmFucktard.
They had their “doubts” and sat and discusse these doubts over , perhaps, a brandy or two, after dinner and in front of the fire.
Fact is, NONE of them dared say it to the American people and to the troops, and to the families of the troops who have to greet their loved ones draped in an Americna flag over their casket.
Feh on theim all. They are now saying, when it is “safe” given the mess they helped make in Iraq, that they had their “doubts”. Cowards all.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:09 pm“Yes, he’s claimed that he voted for Bush in 2000, I think. Seixon”
And what democrat voted for Bush in 2000? Oh PLEASE – you’ve proven my point, and you’re too stupid to know it!
“Sorry, but I know that you have Eichmann from Ward Churchill. You don’t espouse the intellect to have known anything about world history. Seixon”
Once again, you’re hardly the person who can judge the ‘intellect’ power of others. And I disagree with Churchill’s assessment of the NYC trade center deats as Eichmann’s – because they weren’t actively defending the actions of the ‘party’ or ‘regime’ – which Eichmann (and you) are. His comparison was out of context for the historical significance of the Eichmann defense, just as your ‘claims’ generally are. And I’m not surprised you’re unaware of who Eichmann was or the Nuremburg defenses use by Nazi defendents.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:10 pm“If the Bush administration did stand for those things, you would never have heard any of this on Hardball, nor would you have read about it in the NY Times. Nor have they consolidated religion into the government, nor any of the other pillars of Fascism. Seixon”
They’re working on it, that’s why so few LIBERAL news presenters still exist, and why many reporters and former reporters discuss the PRESSURE their management puts on them if they’re critical of the government.
Wake up idiot.
“I support Bush on the war in Iraq, and would have done so whether it was Clinton, Gore, Bush I, Kerry, or anyone else. Seixon”
A blind follower, I’m guessing a military brat. Learn to think for yourself. Not all wars are good, and just so you know, although I’m a non-violent person I supported our efforts in Afghanistan. Iraq was just a dumb idea from the start. So before you get all stupid on the ‘anti-military’ crap, wake up dimwit.
“Where did I criticize Matthews for having liberals on his show? I merely pointed it out to you, to debunk your hilarious belief that he leans right. How many more strawman arguments can you come up with? Seixon”
You used the presence of liberal guests to ‘infer’ that he’s a liberal – that’s retarded. You posed a strawman, I bashed it, you’re pouty because I showed you to be an idiot.
“So now I’m a hypocrit and retard once again. That list of names is getting pretty long Ryan… Seixon”
So is the list of stupid remarks you make – you bring it on yourself dimwit.
“You don’t want the documents to be released, you don’t care if they are or not, as you have already proven. You believe everything that you believe sheds negative light on Bush, no matter what it is, or who it is coming from. Seixon”
There’s another STUPID comment – I already said I was for documents being released, just like the original Downing Street Memos that ALREADY PROVE this point. Your ‘claims’ are as stupid as you generally are.
And actually most facts do shed negative light on Bush. The only thing seemingly good I’ve seen him do in office is Afghanistan, and he screwed that one up in the end. The drug and economic problems are worse than before, and the Taliban is on the rise. Bush has the ‘midas turd’ touch, everything he touches turns to shit. Don’t blame me, blame him and his idiot advisors.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:17 pmPowell is trying to weasil out of his helping Bush to fool the Congress and American people to wage war on Iraq! He lied willingly to the UN and the Congress, so his political career is ruined forever! He would be wise to pack his bags and move back to Jamaica where he was born!
March 28th, 2006 at 7:20 pmAnd what democrat voted for Bush in 2000?
According to http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/epolls/US/P000.html
11 % of Democrats voted for Bush in 2000
March 28th, 2006 at 7:21 pmTundra,
That’s what we call the ‘Lieberman/Thurmond’ democrat – they’re not really democrats :)
But thanks for the heads up, that’s an interesting number. I’d be curious to see whether that was mainly a regional thing or how widespread it was but the regional links appear to be broken. I don’t remember seeing the regional analysis – interesting stuff though!
But Tundra, you know those are ‘exit’ polls, and according to republicans, they aren’t reliable. Sorry, but I couldn’t resist :)
March 28th, 2006 at 7:28 pmyou know those are ‘exit’ polls, and according to republicans, they aren’t reliable
Well I hate Polls in general, because I think they can be made to say anything pretty easy. But then again if they are supporting me I can accept them a little :)
March 28th, 2006 at 7:35 pmZookeeper,
Just admit it, you are just repeating what you have been told by your puppet-masters. You calling Matthews “Tweety” is the first indication of that. Calling me a “fucktard” isn’t going to change that Matthews is not in love with the Bush administration, as it seem most of the people here, and you, believe. What’s with this crowd and name-calling?
Ryan,
“And what democrat voted for Bush in 2000? Oh PLEASE – you’ve proven my point, and you’re too stupid to know it!”
Eh, you ever heard of 9/11 Republicans? What about all the Republicans who voted for Bush in 2000, who are now Democrats? You know, like perhaps Mr. Matthews? You can’t even comprehend simple points.
“And I’m not surprised you’re unaware of who Eichmann was or the Nuremburg defenses use by Nazi defendents.”
Where did I show I was unaware? I simply alleged that you had heard it from Churchill, and not because you have read up on the history of WWII. Another strawman, as I am perfectly aware of Eichmann and Nuremburg.
“They’re working on it, that’s why so few LIBERAL news presenters still exist, and why many reporters and former reporters discuss the PRESSURE their management puts on them if they’re critical of the government.
Wake up idiot.”
Heh. Yeah, they’ve been “working on it” for years now. Odd how they haven’t been able to do it yet, you know, since they are apparently fascists. I didn’t know that fascists asked permission to become fascists. Bush couldn’t even put Harriet Miers on the bench for crying out loud.
So few LIBERAL presenters exist? What about DEMOCRATS? You know that there are very few people who describe themselves as LIBERAL in the USA, don’t you? Or do I have to pull up a few polls to prove it to you? Only about 10% of the country see themselves as LIBERAL. So why in the hell would there be lots of LIBERAL news presenters? They are mostly DEMOCRATS.
What former reporter has discussed pressure for being critical of the government? Can you name even one? What do you think ThinkProgress and all these other loon sites use for their information? Non-existent media? LOL.
NY Times, WaPo, CBS, and all the rest are critical of the government all the damn time, and you goons jump aboard their lies all the time. Yet you claim they don’t exist.
You are so brainwashed by ThinkProgress and others sites that you don’t even realize that the truth is right in front of your face every single day.
A blind follower, I’m guessing a military brat. Learn to think for yourself. Not all wars are good, and just so you know, although I’m a non-violent person I supported our efforts in Afghanistan. Iraq was just a dumb idea from the start. So before you get all stupid on the ‘anti-military’ crap, wake up dimwit.
A blind follower? Eh, no. I concluded that removing Saddam Hussein was the best thing to do in Iraq – and the vast majority of Iraqis agree with me.
I’m not a military brat, in fact, the only people in my family to have served in the military were my grandparents. (Oh, and I’ve set up a trap for you here, let’s see if you take the bait.)
Not all wars are good, indeed. The Vietnam war was ill-conceived. As were all our military adventures in South America. The Iraq war, on the other hand, is not a dumb idea as will be made apparent to you some years from now.
You supported the war in Afghanistan? Well gosh, hate to break it to you, but the Coalition death rate there was the same in 2005 as it was in Iraq.
You used the presence of liberal guests to ‘infer’ that he’s a liberal – that’s retarded. You posed a strawman, I bashed it, you’re pouty because I showed you to be an idiot.
Ehm, no. I pointed to him having Bush-critical guests on his show, to show that Matthews is not a fan of the Bush administration, because he isn’t, he thinks they are liars, mostly because he believes his dishonest reporter David Shuster. I say that Matthews is a Democrat, or at least leans Democrat. I’ve never used the word liberal to describe him because he is clearly not. You’re the only one with strawmen here, as I never said any of the things you pretend I did.
There’s another STUPID comment – I already said I was for documents being released, just like the original Downing Street Memos that ALREADY PROVE this point. Your ‘claims’ are as stupid as you generally are.
Yes, you said so after I pressed you on it for how many comments? But you don’t care if they are released or not – because you already believe everything cited from them. The Downing Street MEMO was never produced, and thus I don’t believe the contents described within it until I see that either. Of course, you no doubt believe everything about the DSM, even though you’ve never seen it. I’m not as foolish.
Tundra: “11 % of Democrats voted for Bush in 2000″
Ouch, Ryan take a seat.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:38 pm“Not all wars are good, indeed. The Vietnam war was ill-conceived. As were all our military adventures in South America. The Iraq war, on the other hand, is not a dumb idea as will be made apparent to you some years from now. Seixon”
Wow, a moment of cogent thought – congratulations. You’re not 100% retarded after all.
“You supported the war in Afghanistan? Well gosh, hate to break it to you, but the Coalition death rate there was the same in 2005 as it was in Iraq. Seixon”
That’s what you get for being ’stupid’ and assuming why I’m against the Iraq war. Stop projecting YOUR value of a war on others. Afghanistan was a good idea because THAT’S WHERE THE TERRORISTS WERE (AND MANY STILL ARE) that attacked us. Unfortunately for everyone, Iraq only became an al queda haven AFTER the attack – and because of it they’ve had a recruitment boom.
Iraq didn’t attack us, and the war in Iraq and especially the post-war occupation was horribly planned (as was the one in Afghanistan and WHY we have so many problems there). Post-war occupation planning is every bit as important as the invasion, and these nimrods FUBAR’d yet another mission from ineptitude. It MAY have been possible to invade and even produce a democratic state in Iraq, but unlikely. It’s not a monolithic society, and never has been. It’s riddled with ethnic, religious and social differences that produce a fractious and difficult region to democratize through force. And the force we have to implement this is way too low. Perhaps as the Iraqi forces come on line things will get better, assuming they don’t decide to just start killing each other instead.
Sorry, but Iraq is an even BIGGER blunder than Vietnam is.
“Tundra: “11 % of Democrats voted for Bush in 2000″
Ouch, Ryan take a seat.
Comment by Seixon”
That’s from an exit poll, most of which includes RED states. You sure do ‘burn’ easy for someone who’s pro military. Grow some cajones prissy boy.
Everyone knows that ~5-10% of Democrats are Zell Millers who refuse to call themselves republicans as they cling to the party for ‘historic’ reasons.
And none of that changes the fact that Matthews and his show swings HARD to the right.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:51 pm
Seixon, if you think Matthews sounds like a democrat, you’re an utter idiot. The Bush administration IS A PACK OF LIARS, and many REPUBLICANS I know say the same things – but they’re TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVES, and not NeoCon fawning whack jobs.
I’m sorry, but anyone that thinks McCain isn’t really a republican is NOT a Democrat.
March 28th, 2006 at 7:55 pmA song on this theme: “THESE ARE THE ONES WHO DIE” :
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=170140
March 28th, 2006 at 7:57 pmThat’s from an exit poll, most of which includes RED states.
Irrelevant when taken in context of your original question:
And what democrat voted for Bush in 2000? Oh PLEASE!
Red states are authorized one solitary Democrat in them who happened to vote for Bush.
Everyone knows that ~5-10% of Democrats are Zell Millers who refuse
But that still leaves 1-6% for your point rebuttal.
(You realize my only mission in life is to keep you on your toes right? hehe)
March 28th, 2006 at 8:09 pmI am sure Colin Powell has deep regrets regarding how history will view him. He was always the loyal soldier, even as he compromised his personal ethics in the past. (Viet Nam, Iran/Contra) The topper of it all was that he let his politics interfere in his value judgment in the run up to the war in Iraq. He allowed himself to be made the fool, he continued to defend his lame and faulty arguments, and in the end, it is he who will be counted along with the WHIG cabal. Too bad, but I have no sympathy.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:18 pmI believe I heard someone on Pacifica the other day saying that Powell was one of the staffers involved in the My Lai coverup? Anyone have any onfo on that?
March 28th, 2006 at 8:25 pmIf it’s true, it makes perfect sense, and nicely debunks him as an honorable soldier following orders…
Tundra,
I’ve dealt with worse (including today). I can deal with people who want to keep me on my toes, as opposed to those who simply want to deceive, deny or derail. Your kind of responses are always welcome :)
But your response still didn’t change the fact that a relatively small percentage of Democrats voted for Bush – and in fact 8% of Republicans voted for Gore. I’m sure most republicans would reject them as being ‘not republican’ in the same way – right?
March 28th, 2006 at 8:25 pmPowell deserves ignominy. What a frickin’ pussy. Good soldier, my ass. Like the Nazis were all just following orders, too.
Time to drive the bastards out! But HOW–when the election system has been taken over by Diebold and the neocon-controlled election companies?
But then there’s Clint Curtis. Clint Curtis is mounting a congressional bid in Florida against Tom Feeney. As many of you know, Curtis was the programmer hired by Feeney to write election-stealing software a few years back. Since then, much has happened, including the suspicious death of the Florida Inspector General Raymond Lemme looking into the matter and the total media clampdown of any serious discussion of electronic election manipulation in Florida and across the nation. Curtis, a former Republican, became so disgusted by what he saw that he became a whistleblower. The whole sordid tale is chronicled on http://www.bradblog.com.
Here’s Curtis in his own words:
My name is Clint Curtis. I am running for the U.S. House of Representatives in Florida’s 24th Congressional District. This great district is currently represented by one of the most corrupt politicians in history. Having personally attended closed-door meetings where Tom Feeney spoke candidly about his aspirations of corruption forces me to provide this district with an alternative to this man. I will need your help.
http://www.clintcurtis.com
Now Curtis is now taking on the VERY well-funded Feeney. He promises to fight for fair elections and to expose electronic vote fraud. He is the ONLY candidate who will take it to the NeoCons on this issue. And he needs to raise $5K in the next 2 weeksa to get on the ballot.
Because of his willingness to take on election fraud, I believe Curtis may be the single most important candidate for the progressive community to promote. Please visit his web site and offer to help, donate even $5 if you can spare it, and help spread the word. It’s time to TAKE BACK AMERICA–and Mr. Curtis may be own only chance of overcoming a rigged election system.
http://www.clintcurtis.com
March 28th, 2006 at 8:28 pmSKdeA,
That’s correct:
In fact his role in Mai Lai/My Lai appears to be similar to his coverup of the Iraq war ‘evidence’. It appears to be his ‘role’ to enable others to lie.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:28 pmRyan,
Wow, a moment of cogent thought – congratulations. You’re not 100% retarded after all.
Your assumptions and smearing came to a crash. What a pity.
Afghanistan was a good idea because THAT’S WHERE THE TERRORISTS WERE (AND MANY STILL ARE) that attacked us. Unfortunately for everyone, Iraq only became an al queda haven AFTER the attack – and because of it they’ve had a recruitment boom.
Yeah, and then some of them went to Iraq afterwards. The Iraq was is about quashing the reasons for terrorism, not responding to 9/11. The terrorists would come wherever we went in the Arab world, no matter how justified the war was. Even if the UN was in Iraq, the terrorists would be there. There is now one less dictator in the Middle East sponsoring terrorism, and oppressing people into submission. This will be important later on, even though you might not realize it now.
Iraq didn’t attack us, and the war in Iraq and especially the post-war occupation was horribly planned (as was the one in Afghanistan and WHY we have so many problems there).
It’s sure easy to play armchair quarterback, isn’t it? Plans don’t always go as you intend them to, and for you to sit and pretend that they are incompetent simply because some things went bad is just ridiculous. Would you have said that Clinton screwed the pooch in Somalia too? Doubt it. Shit happens, and you have to try and deal with it the best you can. I wasn’t in Iraq or Afghanistan, I don’t know of anyone who said that things should have rather been done in this or that way before what happened.
It MAY have been possible to invade and even produce a democratic state in Iraq, but unlikely. It’s not a monolithic society, and never has been. It’s riddled with ethnic, religious and social differences that produce a fractious and difficult region to democratize through force.
Yes, because the USA, a country riddled with ethnic, religious, and social differences, is just ripping apart at the seams. Right? One expected that Iraqis who had been oppressed would come together when freed from this oppression. That seems to have been true for the Shia and Kurds, but not the Sunni. They underestimated how badly the Sunni would react.
And the force we have to implement this is way too low. Perhaps as the Iraqi forces come on line things will get better, assuming they don’t decide to just start killing each other instead.
So we should have more forces there? You don’t think that would agitate the Iraqis more?
Sorry, but Iraq is an even BIGGER blunder than Vietnam is.
I hereby award you the Ahistorical Award 2006.
We have accomplished infinitely more in Iraq than we ever did in Vietnam, and lost far fewer than we ever did there, on both sides. Geez what a bunch of tripe.
That’s from an exit poll, most of which includes RED states. You sure do ‘burn’ easy for someone who’s pro military. Grow some cajones prissy boy.
Eh, I sure do hope it includes red states, otherwise it wouldn’t be an accurate poll. LOL. Keep trying to ignore that you were wrong.
Everyone knows that ~5-10% of Democrats are Zell Millers who refuse to call themselves republicans as they cling to the party for ‘historic’ reasons.
So “everyone knows” passes as an argument? LOL Regardless, Zell Miller was a Democrat, as are any of the others you are talking about.
Also, you are ignoring the fact that I am talking about 2000 vs. 2004. Not everyone who voted for Bush in 2000 did so in 2004, and vice versa. I’ve been trying to get you to see this for some time now, but you don’t get it.
And none of that changes the fact that Matthews and his show swings HARD to the right.
Yes, keep gulping up Media Matters. They didn’t evaluate the content of the shows, only who was on it. So in other words, if Matthews had a Republican on the show to harass him about the NSA scandal, you would still say that Matthews “leans right” even though that is completely false.
You are completely hopeless.
Seixon, if you think Matthews sounds like a democrat, you’re an utter idiot. The Bush administration IS A PACK OF LIARS, and many REPUBLICANS I know say the same things – but they’re TRADITIONAL CONSERVATIVES, and not NeoCon fawning whack jobs.
Yes, Matthews DOES sound like Democrat, because he repeats Democrat talking points. Matthews can be a conservative AND a Democrat. Something that might not have occurred to your simple mind.
I’m sorry, but anyone that thinks McCain isn’t really a republican is NOT a Democrat.
Eh, huh? You have a two word out of context quote, and you are settled? Jesus fucking Christ. The entire media was calling McCain a “maverick” and saying he was a centrist when he was saying what they wanted him to. Then he started being more Republican because he wants to get the nomination for 2008. Try to keep up.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:33 pm#71 SKdeA
March 28th, 2006 at 8:36 pmYes, I also heard the same. In fact, someone on a thread here at TP offered information on Powell’s connection to the MyLai massacre.
One could compare the soldier Powell to the soldiers who were in Hitler’s Army; they were good soldiers too, knew how to follow orders, and followed the rules, but their leader was corrupt, hence, so were they.
Some of us have been saying this for the last 4 years. This is a conspiracy. The American people need to address the problem for what it is. You want a look at some of the likely conspirators? Go to http://www.achievement.org, and look at the highlights of the last 4 retreats. You will see names like Powell, Cheney, the Clintons, Rumsfeld, Karzai, Ashchroft, Gonzales, Scalia, Kennedy, Chris Matthews, McCain, Frist, Daschle, Wesley Clark, Richard Myers, Guiliani, Bloomberg, Kissinger, Tenet, Bush Sr., etc.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:37 pmI’m sure most republicans would reject them as being ‘not republican’ in the same way – right?
Of course! You aren’t handing me the John McCain argument here are you? I would say for each Miller the republicans have a McCain
If that was viable then 11% of Democrats voted for Bush vs 8% of Republicans voting for Gore.
*Disclaimer* It is an exit poll and you know how I feel about them, also it assumes for each Zell Miller on the Left there is a John McCain on the Right*
March 28th, 2006 at 8:39 pmOops, I didn’t see that Ryan had replied before I offered my lame corroboration. He is usually pretty quick and pretty accurate in his information.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:40 pmColin Powell has only one fault: he is allways loyal to his “superiors”. He is a strict follower of his military training. I believe that he regrets his role in the Bush misadministration, but stays silent because of his loyalty in obeying his “superiors”. If he had managed to snare a candidate position in 2000, 911 would have never happened and about 6000 Americans who are now dead would still be alive (along with 45,000 Iraqis).
March 28th, 2006 at 8:54 pmplunger,
It wouldn’t have been the best thing for Halliburton or Carlyle or Shell or Exxon, but it would have been the best thing for the American people and the Iraqi people.
Yes, the Iraqi people loved Saddam Hussein. Oh, wait. The oil companies make money no matter what happens. If you think the Iraq war is the reason that the oil price has gone up, you have been misinformed.
March 28th, 2006 at 8:59 pm“These images speak volumes about the responsibility borne by high-ranking officials for the widespread abuse of detainees held in United States custody abroad.â€
Interesting. So Charles Graner smashing some Iraqi rapist’s face in implicates Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney. Interesting indeed. I guess the widespread crimes in the USA are also their doing. Evil bastards.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:01 pm“Yes, the Iraqi people loved Saddam Hussein. Oh, wait. The oil companies make money no matter what happens. Seixon”
And there’s that ‘ignorance’ again. Most of the Iraqi oil fields were contracted by French/ Russian and Non-American companies (partially because of previous policies on Iraq). You’re wrong YET AGAIN Dimwit.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:10 pm“Interesting. So Charles Graner smashing some Iraqi rapist’s face in implicates Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney. Interesting indeed. I guess the widespread crimes in the USA are also their doing. Evil bastards. Comment by Seixon ”
If you don’t believe that the executive is in charge of and controls what happens in the military, then you’re a FOOL and not just an idiot. They are RESPONSIBLE for what happens – PERIOD – in military matters. Why? Because the military doesn’t take a CRAP without an order. You comparing ‘crime’ to systematic mistreatment and torture of prisoners is just IDIOTIC. How old are you 6?
March 28th, 2006 at 9:13 pmSeixon,
Following your arguments is like standing behind someone pissing into the wind. No one is happy, and you’re the only one gratified by the mess you leave behind. Learn how to debate or STFU.
Take a clue from Tundra, he’s conservative, and he doesn’t make my skin crawl. You’re just an idiot though.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:15 pmWhat if we had spent the 300 + billion on research of renewable energy rather than war. Ole dumb ass Carter seems to be smarter every year.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:49 pmWhat if we had spent the 300 + billion on research of renewable energy rather than war. Ole dumb ass Carter seems to be smarter every year.
March 28th, 2006 at 9:49 pmSay: Colin Powell had one fault – he was loyal to his superiors were they right or wrong. While his soul was tortured, he remained loyal until the 2004 election cycle was done. I could only wish that he had placed his nation above the Republican party and resigned in 2002. If he had done that, he would have been at least VP material in 2004 and this cake walk would have been a thing of the past.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:02 pm“I’m a Hindu dimwit,…â€
Comment by Ryan Neat — March 28, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
Comment by troll — March 28, 2006 @ 9:37 pm
March 28th, 2006 at 10:07 pm#Republican anti-gay activist Earl “Butch†Kimmerling confessed to molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
Now what was Debra Maggart saying?
Hey Seixon heres a face you and Graner can go Smash in, one of your OWN.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:07 pmMy posts 81 and 91,
March 28th, 2006 at 10:10 pmBoth express the same sentiments – apparently one of the engines between TP and me malfunctioned. I put together 91 after 81 seemed to go into the great bit-bucket in the sky. Sorry.
The Iraq war breaks with American tradition by being explicitly defined as ”preventive,” but in other ways it fulfills the core tradition — the eschewing of diplomacy in favor of war preparation, and wars, whose real purpose is to feed the insatiable appetite of the economic, political, and cultural behemoth on the Potomac. The Pentagon is 63 years old: Key moments in its lifetime cry out to be freshly understood.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:12 pmhttp://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/03/27/rumsfeld_and_the_big_picture/
walt said on post#? =)
ennyhoo, well put above Walt.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:18 pmIndeed Powell was a smart man and knew from the previous Bush Administration about the ‘crazies’ as he called them. It’s too bad that he didn’t come forward earlier. Worse He’s only one of likely Tens or Hundreds that follow the military dictate and forget their inner compass.
Colin Powell is a distinguished military man of honor. He was in the service as a black officer during Viet Nam and there found the reality that one can only change the system from inside. He did his duty for his country and tried to effect positive action until he saw that no one in the administration was listening. There are many in this regime who should be castigated. Secretary Powell is not one of them.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:19 pmColin does not need to be castigated by me or anyone. Living with ones own conscience is imprisonment done righteously
March 28th, 2006 at 10:22 pm#91
You “stolid” my post Walt- well said.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:22 pmHeya Ryan,
They are RESPONSIBLE for what happens
I agree, I do not believe they ordered the abuse. I do not think the administration planned any of the things that were done there. But yes as the administration they are responsible for the people under them.
Why? Because the military doesn’t take a CRAP without an order.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:23 pmOn this one with the alleged rape and alleged soldiers breaking into innocent Iraqi houses at night and stealing their TV’s etc, Would that be policy or Iraqi citizens lying to make the military look bad?
Colin Powell has only one fault: he is allways loyal to his “superiorsâ€. He is a strict follower of his military training.
In the military that isn’t a fault it is a requirement. Much worse things happen when you have “100,000 warriors” trying to do what they want or feel is right as opposed to doing the mission tasked.
Given that was he the best choice for Sec of State? I don’t think so. A man of his talent and loyalty could have been better suited in the Department of Defense (opinion noted) planning the invasion/rebuilding.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:35 pm#101 – Tundra,
March 28th, 2006 at 10:46 pmYou figured it out! He was miscast. But then, as Secretary of Defense, would he have sponsored an invasion of an innocent country strictly because it’s ruler was on W’s hit list? If he did, would he have done it with insufficient forces and no follow-up plan other than picking up rose petals strewn in front of the invading troops? Rummy is a sot!
Walt,
I didn’t mean as Secretary of Defense. I meant as a Planner/Organizer. He could have been handed a mission plan and figured out what he needed to make it happen. The kind of position where his strategic experience plus his knowledge of troop capabilities could have been used best.
If the roll was Sec of Defense, then yes he would have done what he was tasked with. I think he would have made smarter choices and handled it better just based on his experience.
March 28th, 2006 at 10:58 pmAre you saying that a black man shouldn’t be allowed to hold such a high post?
(I’m kidding of course)
March 28th, 2006 at 11:01 pmBut does it really matter now?…
More proof Collin Powell had reservations about invading Iraq. ……
March 28th, 2006 at 11:06 pmImpeachment is not enough. First impeachment; then indictment. Once the smarmy bastard is out of the Oval Office, he should be indicted and stand trial for his crimes. § 1809. Criminal sanctions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act says “an offense described in this section is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.”
That’s 5 years and a $10,000.00 fine for EACH separate wiretap. If there’s been 1,000 taps, that’s 5,000 years in Leavenworth and a Ten Million Dollar fine. Sounds about right to me.
March 29th, 2006 at 12:27 amhttp://www.nextstudent.com/consolidation_loans/federal-consolidation.asp
March 29th, 2006 at 1:29 amStudent loans, and student loan consolidation – Lock in the lowest rate with NextStudent. We also offer a scholarship search engine, private student loans and federal student loan applications.
Who are these people who dont believe that bushco.has been lying all along?
March 29th, 2006 at 2:03 amTundra Powell was a tool for the Army in vietnam helping cover up My lai, and as Casper Weinburgers assistant , he was the one who went to the DOD logistics and had them transferr the weapons from US military stock piles to CIA stock piles to “give” them to Ollie north to give to Iran, he was up to his neck in Iran- contra and when Bush 43 pardoned Wienburger then Powell ducked a BIG one. That is one MAJOR reason he NEVER runs for office because during the campaign way too many skelatons would come tumbling out of his closet.
March 29th, 2006 at 2:14 amwe are all headed down into a very deep pit here.
March 29th, 2006 at 3:03 amwho EVER answered for the false infomation that Powell presented to the U.N. ? [ he called it a "stain" on his record. but that is why we went to war!!
his "stain" has killed 1000's on american soilders].
if condi rice was the national security advisor, she should have been fired. was she in the loop, or is she Bush’s lap dog ?
i think she is an evil climber who just says “yes” to whatever Bush wants and has her own agenda to get more power.
this is without a doubt the stupidest prez. i have seen in my lifetime by far.
[i remember before this war that they showed footage of him in a supermarket just fasinated by a scanner that scanned prices off the side of the boxes].
i kid you not.
i believe richard clark when he said that bush ws running around saying “we have to tie this into iraq” (never forget the words “he tried to kill my daddy” that Bush uttered as part of his hatred for saddam… reason for war? we saw).
don’t be fooled as the worst is yet to come.
the republicans are going to tank out in the next election, only to have a democratic prez pull our troops out of iraq, and a civil war will break out.
now the republicans will hit back that our troops were pulled out too soon when in reality, we will have no exit plan no matter who’s in the oval office then.
what a great plan.
this war is a loser war as much as those 52.000+ boys that died in vietnam died for.
the dominoe therory never existed just as much as there were never weapons of mass destructon in iraq.
what is the difference?
i find it repulsive that we sit back and watch a prez who is NOT an encumbent, do and say whatever he wants, when we know that shotgun dick has no plans to run for that office either.
thanks boys for dropping your crap right on the next administration.
but by then the binks truck will have driven off as we have now raised our debt ceiling to $9,000,000,000,000.00
i have never been happier i don’t have children.
by the way, if this war really was so noble, why didn’t George’s daughters go over and fight ?
i mean, are they “children of privilage” or solid american citizens willing to help their own father’s cause to save the world from terrorists?
you cannot send other peoples daughters to war and shelter your own and call it a just cause.
the sooner this “outsouced” war comes to an end for the u.s.a. the better… because no matter when we leave, they will tear each other apart.
the media can’t stop calling people causing violence in iraq an “insurgence” when this is pure infighting.
i guess all this won’t matter when all these people who caused this mess, die, wealthy and happy, and maybe not even living on our soil anymore.
did i mention that by the time i’m ready to get S.S.I. 1/3 of the us population will have to supportme and the other 2/3 ?
i have a feeling that a “mystery disease” that will kill only older american’s will take my life. only to find out that it was cheaper to kill me then to keep me alive as i wouldn’t be a burden to the tax base but by then i’ll be dead.
do you see a pattern here ?
please copy and paste this and send it to others.
did i mention the chinese army has control of the panama canal that we gave away ?
and the hits just keep on coming.
plunger,
No, I’m sure that Cheny never had the ntention to drive up the price of oil with his actions.
So now Cheney is an oil man? I thought he was a Halliburton man. Oh, are you one of those people who think Halliburton is an oil company..? Sure hope not. As for the rest of your rambling – do you have any evidence of Cheney conspiring, on his own, to raise oil prices by invading Iraq? Or might increasing Chinese demand, lowering refining capacity, and maxed production have a little something to do with it as well?
Nah, it’s gotta be Cheny. Yup.
Ryan,
And there’s that ‘ignorance’ again. Most of the Iraqi oil fields were contracted by French/ Russian and Non-American companies (partially because of previous policies on Iraq). You’re wrong YET AGAIN Dimwit.
It’s interesting you would bring that up. You see, none of the American oil companies have any such contracts today, and won’t. So you’d rather that French and Russian oil firms help Saddam Hussein get rich while literally stealing the Iraqis oil, rather than the Iraqis owning it themselves and spending it on things other than WMDs, weapons, and funding Palestinian terrorists?
Again, why am I the dimwit here? Oh, and I see you swished right past the point where most Iraqis agree with ME, and not you. Tough to admit it huh?
If you don’t believe that the executive is in charge of and controls what happens in the military, then you’re a FOOL and not just an idiot. They are RESPONSIBLE for what happens – PERIOD – in military matters. Why? Because the military doesn’t take a CRAP without an order. You comparing ‘crime’ to systematic mistreatment and torture of prisoners is just IDIOTIC. How old are you 6?
Aha, so Lyndon Johnson was responsible for the My Lai Massacre? He ordered it, did he? Who’s the fool here? The dude pretending that American soldiers are robots that only do what they’re told, or the one who acknowledges that criminals can be found wherever you go? Charles Graner and his buddies did what they did, against the rules already set forth by General Sanchez and Donald Rumsfeld, just to enjoy themselves. I’m sure you’ve seen the pictures, all smiles and thumbs up. Did Rumsfeld order them to do that too? Did Rumsfeld order them to have sex with each other in front of the prisoners too, or was that just some kind of robot malfunction?
Using the same logic you are using here, the action of any “soldier” is actually the fault of their supervisor. In other words, if you’re the boss of a McDonald’s, then it is automatically your fault if one of your employees goes apeshit and kills someone on the job. Right? I mean, your subordinates only do what you say, right?
Please. You are lying to yourself here and it’s disgusting.
Following your arguments is like standing behind someone pissing into the wind. No one is happy, and you’re the only one gratified by the mess you leave behind. Learn how to debate or STFU.
Take a clue from Tundra, he’s conservative, and he doesn’t make my skin crawl. You’re just an idiot though.
Learn how to debate? What, are you back to using your “I can’t read what you’re writing” dodge? Anyone else here can follow what I am saying. The problem is that you don’t want to, because I went to town on you, and you are too lame to admit it. It’s funny, because I said some of the same things as Tundra. In fact, I read their statements after mine, and they made the same point I did.
Pissing in the wind reminds me of what you’ve been doing this whole time: smearing, assuming, strawmen, name-calling, speculating, ignoring facts. I don’t even know how long the list of names you have called me is now. Ad hominem does not replace substance in a debate.
Your hate has gone too far, and you have only become self-destructive. You cannot even see the truth when it is right in front of you. When you grow up, maybe you’ll see the error of your ways.
In the mean time, I’m going to laugh some more about your claim that soldiers only do what they are told…
LOL
March 29th, 2006 at 3:10 amThat makes Bush a mass murdering thief he stould be prosecuted , He makes a fool of America
March 29th, 2006 at 3:44 am[...] Think Progress has the partial transcript from the March 27 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews in which Philippe Sands, author of “Lawless World,” said a third memo exists that shows then-Secretary of State Colin Powell was against going to war without a second United Nations resolution. PHILIPPE SANDS: Another memo which records a conversation between Colin Powell and his counterpart in the United Kingdom, Jack Straw, which makes it clear that in Colin Powell’s eyes if there wasn’t enough evidence for a second Security Council resolution, then there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the U.S. going it alone. (emphasis from Think Progress) I am not sure how people feel about Colin Powell but I always liked him, and of everybody in the administration, he was the only one with a brain. Perhaps that was because he served in the military, unlike… [...]
March 29th, 2006 at 4:30 amyou cannot send other peoples daughters to war and shelter your own and call it a just cause.
We have an all volunteer military. Noone sends their kids off to fight. Each Soldier/Sailor/Airman makes that choice on their own. They are not sent off by their parents.
Quite frankly from what I know about the Bush girls I wouldn’t want them fighting next to me. Especially just to prove a point. There are others at stake and they deserve to have competent people next to them.
did i mention the chinese army has control of the panama canal that we gave away ?
March 29th, 2006 at 6:48 amBush didn’t give away the Panama Canal, that was a previous president (NAME WITHHELD)
Being a former military man, was Powell merely folllowing the orders of his Commander-in-Chief as he had always been conditioned to do? If he, Powell, has any honor still in him, he should do the right thing by coming out publicly of what he knew transpired then. After all, he is not considering to run for public office, is he?
Please, people. The attack upon Iraq was not and has not ever been about oil. If oil had been the overiding consideration, the nearest place and with abundance too, would be Venezuela. It’s all about ‘a shitty little country called Isreal’ according to the French Ambassador to Britain.
March 29th, 2006 at 7:15 amI am asking that everyone here (yes, everyone) watch this small vidoe and post a reply. I just want to know if there is still any humanity or compassion.
http://www.peacetakescourage.com/3years.html
March 29th, 2006 at 7:16 amColin Powell is the Benedict Arnold of the 21st century.
It was his testimony at the U.N. about WMD facilities that gave me my only point of pause and doubt about Bush as Powell was someone I respected. I won’t make that mistake again.
March 29th, 2006 at 8:22 amThought this was a bit off topic, but relevent to several of the communication issues we experience:
Traditionalists — Born 1900 to 1945
Sometimes referred to as the World War II generation, traditionalists have worked longer than any of the other generations. Experiencing two world wars and the Great Depression taught most members of this generation how to live within limited means. Traditionalists are loyal, hardworking, financially conservative and faithful to institutions. Many are approaching retirement or are retired and now working part-time jobs.
Baby boomers — Born 1946 to 1964
When the baby boomers entered the work force, they felt compelled to challenge the status quo, and they’re responsible for many of the rights and opportunities now taken for granted. Their boundless optimism led many to fight for change. Because of their large numbers, they faced competition from each other for jobs. Baby boomers all but invented the 60-hour workweek, figuring that demonstrated hard work and loyalty to employers was one way to get ahead. Their sense of who they are is deeply connected to their career achievements. As a whole, this generation is politically adept when it comes to navigating political minefields in the workplace.
Generation Xers — Born 1965 to 1980
Generation Xers are technologically savvy, having ushered in the era of video games and personal computers during their formative years. But witnessing skyrocketing divorce rates, their parents being laid off after years of dedicated service and challenges to the presidency, organized religion and big corporations instilled a sense of skepticism and distrust of institutions. Because they don’t expect employer loyalty, they see no problem changing jobs to advance professionally.
In contrast to the baby boomers’ overtime work ethic, generation Xers believe that work isn’t the most important thing in their lives. They’re resourceful and hardworking, but once 5 o’clock hits, they’d rather pursue other interests.
Millennials — Born 1981 to 1999
Many in this generation are still in school, but the oldest millennials are recent college graduates just now entering the work force. These are kids who’ve had access to cell phones, pagers and personal computers all their lives.
Millennials are eager to learn and enjoy questioning things. They’re confident and have high self-esteem. They’re collaborators and favor teamwork, having functioned in groups in school, organized sports and extracurricular activities from a very young age. They reject the notion that they have to stay within the rigid confines of a job description. Expect them to keep their career options open. As opposed to generation Xers who change jobs, millennials are more likely to make entire career changes or to build parallel careers.
March 29th, 2006 at 8:30 amReal vs Fake.
If Colin Powell were a man of real character, and had real integrity, he would have stood up and shouted: This is wrong, and I am not going to be a part of it.” It would not have been easy, and yes, he may have been pilloried, but it would have been the mark of real courage and the right thing to do. He ain’t no Rosa Parks.
Now, he is as responsible as Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld for the debacle that is Iraq, and the hundreds of thousands of deaths it precipitated.
March 29th, 2006 at 9:54 amHow does Powell live with himself? He was the only one who stood in the way of going to war, and he caved. The whole US and the world, were watching him and hoping he would stand his ground. When he spoke to the UN, it was all over, and many knew then that he had sold us down the river, and now everybody knows that he did.
Rumsfeld and Bush keep marketing the war. At a recent press conference, Rumsfeld threw in the tactical comment that the insurgents were so despicable that they were even putting bombs in the bellies of dead babies, so that when relatives came to claim them that they’d blow up more people.
Bombs in dead babies??? Even if that is true, how low can he get in trying to manipulate the public’s emotions (and shut off their brains with the shock)??? Very low indeed. It doesn’t get lower.
March 29th, 2006 at 10:35 amread a letter to the editor yesterday comparing the american people and thier iraqi war with the german people and thier acceptance of hitlers b.s. if history is to view us differently we cannot allow these bast@rds to escape punishment for thier lies and distortions. they must be held accountable NOW!!!!!!! indict and impeach immediately!
March 29th, 2006 at 11:19 amI am not surprised ,I have said it in the beginning and will say it here,BUSH IS A DICTATOR and as far as I am knowing there mit not be elections in 2008,BUSH has plans to stay in power as to scare you in the sence that there will be a terrorist attack and there can be no elections,Powell knew this and now he is sacked,America is heading to be a dictatorship which it is already ,you herd it here first
March 29th, 2006 at 11:20 amHow in blazes does Colin Powell get away with it? His entire career has been marked with ‘going along to get along’. He’s ‘coverd up’ and capitulated – ‘for the good of the service’, or for the good of Colin, on virtually everything he’s ever done. Mai Lia…Iran-Contra…this God-forsaken War…every one of them has Colin Powell’s fingerprints all over it. And yet, people still cut him slack. Why? Because his is such a wonderful, ‘boots-straps’ story? Because he’s a ‘nice guy’? I don’t know, and I don’t care. He’s failed his country and his men far too many times to ever again be trusted or believed.
March 29th, 2006 at 11:23 amI want to give the benefit of a doubt to Seixon because he wants “proof”, but he seems to be willfully obtuse or willfully ignorant of all the evidence that has come out so far. He also fails to recognize that this particular administration has been the most closed off, most secretive of any in history. They don’t share their “evidence” and hide behind “national security” and “executive privelege”.
The Downing Memos, Richard Clarke, Former secretary O’neil, etc… have all revealed Bush’s push for war with Iraq pre 9/11. All of the reasons/justifications, from WMDs, to Al Qaeda ties, to Iraqi liberation have all gone up in flames and have been revealed as lies and yet he/she still gives the benefit of the doubt to the administration?
Any time any bit of real info gets leaked to the press ala, the secret torture camps in Uzbekistan, the Bush admin goes Ballistic, threatens jail time, and reasserts it’s lies.
Seixon ignores that America’s new policy of torture comes from the top, ala Bush reserving the right to ignore the McCain anti-torture law, Pre-attorney general Gonzalez arguments for the U.S. abandonment of the Geneva convention and the possible use of torture… ” “outrages upon personal dignity” and “inhuman treatment” are “undefined’ and that it is difficult to predict with confidence what action might constitute violations, and that it would be “… For greater detail I refer you to: http://www.lawofwar.org/Torture_Memos_analysis.htm And yet, Seixon seems to be okay with a few lower level grunts being hung out to dry when the policy comes from the very top?
And, while Matthews may not be a fan of Bush’s admin, he is clearly a fan of Bush himself… “We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical, who’s not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who’s president. Women like a guy who’s president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It’s simple. We’re not like the Brits.â€
(5/1/03) ” You know, Tony, there is in the past, it‘s not always there, but sometimes it glimmers with this man, our president, that kind of sunny nobility. How does he bring it back because it hasn‘t been apparent for a while now.” (10/24/05) “Well, it’s probably the greatest gamble since Roosevelt backed Britain before World War II. The president deserves credit, if this gamble comes through — and it’s not clear yet. If his gamble that he can create a democracy in the middle of the Arab world and he does it, he belongs on Mount Rushmore.” (12/16/05) ” I like him. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left — I mean — like him personally.” (11/28/05) and these are just the tip of the iceberg. Furthermore, what’s very interesting is that his praise and support and his claims that the president is popular and “liked” flew in the face of rapidly falling approval numbers.
Hey, don’t get me wrong, I’m all for “proof”, but to willfully disregard that proof when it’s right in front of your eyes? To disregard that the best “proof” is being jealously guarded by the liars and that they ignore every attempt to force the truth from them to include ignoring court orders?
I’ll admit to being an extrremely progressive Liberal, with an inherrent distrust of Bushco, but post 9/11 even I gave him them the benefit of a doubt, but then they liead about when what they knew and when they knew it, I mean come on… “Bin Laden determined to attack U.S.” is too vague to be acted upon? No one conceived of them using planes as weapons despite mulitple reports that said as much? Then they lied about yellow cake, they lied about aluminum tubes, they lied about a report from the head of the IAEA, they lied about links to Al Qaeda. Call me a cynic, but I detected a pattern of willfully misleading the public about matters of national interest which lead to an illegal war where quite likely 100s of thousands have died. we’ll never be able to wash the blood from our hands, and we’ve proven the muslim extremists worst arguments against us. If only they’d lied abut a blow-job they’d be impeached by now.
Before you even try don’t try to suggest that violating the U.N. sanctions made the war legal. You can’t use the U.N. to justify a war the U.N. itself opposed and said was not justified.
And just to rub salt in the wound, most of the Bushco lies leading up to the war could be found with research on the internet well before we launched this bloody campaign. Many of us knew it was built upon lies beofre the first bombs fell. How do we get our country back? How does our country get it’s credibility back? When will the Dems grow a spine? When will true conservative reclaim their party from the neo-cons? Is it already too late?
March 29th, 2006 at 1:13 pmI want to give the benefit of a doubt to Seixon because he wants “proof”, but he seems to be willfully obtuse or willfully ignorant of all the evidence that has come out so far. He also fails to recognize that this particular administration has been the most closed off, most secretive of any in history. They don’t share their “evidence” and hide behind “national security” and “executive privelege”.
The Downing Memos, Richard Clarke, Former secretary O’neil, etc… have all revealed Bush’s push for war with Iraq pre 9/11. All of the reasons/justifications, from WMDs, to Al Qaeda ties, to Iraqi liberation have all gone up in flames and have been revealed as lies and yet he/she still gives the benefit of the doubt to the administration?
Any time any bit of real info gets leaked to the press ala, the secret torture camps in Uzbekistan, the Bush admin goes Ballistic, threatens jail time, and reasserts it’s lies.
Seixon ignores that America’s new policy of torture comes from the top, ala Bush reserving the right to ignore the McCain anti-torture law, Pre-attorney general Gonzalez arguments for the U.S. abandonment of the Geneva convention and the possible use of torture… ” “outrages upon personal dignity” and “inhuman treatment” are “undefined’ and that it is difficult to predict with confidence what action might constitute violations, and that it would be “… For greater detail I refer you to: http://www.lawofwar.org/Torture_Memos_analysis.htm And yet, Seixon seems to be okay with a few lower level grunts being hung out to dry when the policy comes from the very top?
And, while Matthews may not be a fan of Bush’s admin, he is clearly a fan of Bush himself… “We’re proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who’s physical, who’s not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who’s president. Women like a guy who’s president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It’s simple. We’re not like the Brits.â€
(5/1/03) ” You know, Tony, there is in the past, it‘s not always there, but sometimes it glimmers with this man, our president, that kind of sunny nobility. How does he bring it back because it hasn‘t been apparent for a while now.” (10/24/05) “Well, it’s probably the greatest gamble since Roosevelt backed Britain before World War II. The president deserves credit, if this gamble comes through — and it’s not clear yet. If his gamble that he can create a democracy in the middle of the Arab world and he does it, he belongs on Mount Rushmore.” (12/16/05) ” I like him. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left — I mean — like him personally.” (11/28/05) and these are just the tip of the iceberg. Furthermore, what’s very interesting is that his praise and support and his claims that the president is popular and “liked” flew in the face of rapidly falling approval numbers.
Hey, don’t get me wrong, I’m all for “proof”, but to willfully disregard that proof when it’s right in front of your eyes? To disregard that the best “proof” is being jealously guarded by the liars and that they ignore every attempt to force the truth from them to include ignoring court orders?
I’ll admit to being an extrremely progressive Liberal, with an inherrent distrust of Bushco, but post 9/11 even I gave him them the benefit of a doubt, but then they liead about when what they knew and when they knew it, I mean come on… “Bin Laden determined to attack U.S.” is too vague to be acted upon? No one conceived of them using planes as weapons despite mulitple reports that said as much? Then they lied about yellow cake, they lied about aluminum tubes, they lied about a report from the head of the IAEA, they lied about links to Al Qaeda. Call me a cynic, but I detected a pattern of willfully misleading the public about matters of national interest which lead to an illegal war where quite likely 100s of thousands have died. we’ll never be able to wash the blood from our hands, and we’ve proven the muslim extremists worst arguments against us. If only they’d lied abut a blow-job they’d be impeached by now.
Before you even try don’t try to suggest that violating the U.N. sanctions made the war legal. You can’t use the U.N. to justify a war the U.N. itself opposed and said was not justified.
And just to rub salt in the wound, most of the Bushco lies leading up to the war could be found with research on the internet well before we launched this bloody campaign. Many of us knew it was built upon lies beofre the first bombs fell. How do we get our country back? How does our country get it’s credibility back? When will the Dems grow a spine? When will true conservatives reclaim their party from the neo-cons? Is it already too late?
March 29th, 2006 at 1:13 pmSorry about the double post, tried to stop it to make a few corrections, but it went through anyway. My bad.
March 29th, 2006 at 1:19 pmThe Walt / Mearsheimer paper from Harvard and the University of Chicago on the Israel lobby tells the whole story of who over-ruled Colin Powell, and why. Will the controlled media send the Walt / Mearsheimer 83-page paper on the Israel lobby into the Memory Hole? Will it blacklist Professors Walt and Mearsheimer?
March 29th, 2006 at 4:28 pmIs it possible that nobody here and nobody on these cable news programs read James Risen’s book where he states non-categorically that the CIA, the Pentagon and the State department all knew BEFORE 9/11/01 that it was Bush’s intention to invade Iraq?
The one piece of information from Risen’s book that has gotten all the focus is his exposure of the warrantless wiretapping by the NSA. But the rest of his book has one bombshell after another about the inner workings of the CIA and the Pentagon, and how Bush and Cheney were pressing the intelligence communities BEFORE 9/11/01 on Iraq. One quote out of the book is “They intended from day one to invade Iraq, and 9/11 was just a delayance.”
Chris Matthews revealed this past week that former Secretary of Defense Wlm. Cohen told him that in December 2000, right after the Supremes called the election, Cheney called Cohen and told him that he wanted a report from him on only one country. Iraq. Cheney wanted Cohen to brief him on everything that he knew about Iraq.
March 29th, 2006 at 4:31 pmPowell has sold his soul more than once.He was involved with My Lai -intelligence office in Viet Nam and if you you read his book- An American Journey, you will also find out how he covered Stormin Norman’s butt who claimed he took out two Scud batteries when in fact they were Jordanian fuel trucks.
March 30th, 2006 at 9:53 amAlso do not forget that under Powell , the Annual Report on Global Terrorism showed a decrease when in fact it increased.A corrected report had to issued.Shall I go on?
[...] Think Progress [...]
April 2nd, 2006 at 10:47 amWhat world do you people live in? Why did Powell go along with bush, He’s the commander-in-chief, the leader of all of the United States military forces. Any time that a soldier joins the military they are required to swear an oath to “uphold and defend the constitution of the United States of America”. The exact same document which gives absoloute control to the Commander-in-chief in any wartime situation. Another document of historical fame can be quoted “…give unto Ceaser that which art Ceasers, and give unto God that which art God’s…”
April 4th, 2006 at 1:51 pmDon’t be to hard on a man who acted slowly in the face of a morral delima. Look at what the man had to loose, he has dedicated his life to the service of this country. Defending your right to sit here and criticize his every move in hindsite, and we all know how easy it is to judge past mistakes in comparison to actualy making a decision.
I know that I have made mistakes in my life, and were someone to go back through my life with a fine tooth comb and question every dicision I ever made I would probably be found wanting.
“…let he who is without sin cast the first stone…”
I do not agree with the reasons we went to war, but I was ordered to go. I didn’t go over there for oil, nor to see “the unbelivers” punished. I went to war because I was ordered to, and because I knew exactly what my fellow soldiers would face. And I knew that I could not ask them to face it without me there to cover their ass.
That ladies and gentlemen is the reason that soldiers go to war, they go for their brothers and sisters who would die without them.
Viet-Nam was a terrible war, we lost soldiers by the thousands, but we learned a lesson. Once the United States military has lost soldiers on forign soil, the only way to make their sacrifice mean anything at all is to see the thing through to the end. Otherwise each and every soldier who died, every single soldier who will never walk again, have sacrificed their lives for nothing.
I left some blood on the ground in Iraq some of it was my own. I brought men back to base who’s only ride home was in a plastic bag. Would you tell each and every one of us that, “the blood was shed in vain, you bled for nothing go home, we don’t want you here anymore”
we have a job to do in Iraq, to ensure the success of the newly formed, democraticly elected govenment of Iraq. reguardless of the reason we went in there, that is our mission now. If we as a country do not see this thing through to the end, the 4000+ American body bags that have came home so far, are for nothing.
Even if you don’t support the war, support the men and women who are willing to die to keep you free.
[...] Colin Powell [...]
April 14th, 2006 at 1:43 am[...] And yet he chose, for reasons one can’t fathom, to squander his reputation as a man of integrity by making that farcical presentation at the UN. The New York Times reported yesterday on a confidential January 2003 memo that showed President Bush “was determined to invade Iraq” even without a second UN resolution. Yesterday on Hardball, the source of that memo, British scholar Philippe Sands, revealed the existence of yet another revealing pre-war memo: [...]
June 6th, 2006 at 9:23 am[...] Think Progress has the partial transcript from the March 27 edition of Hardball with Chris Matthews in which Philippe Sands, author of "Lawless World," said a third memo exists that shows then-Secretary of State Colin Powell was against going to war without a second United Nations resolution. PHILIPPE SANDS: Another memo which records a conversation between Colin Powell and his counterpart in the United Kingdom, Jack Straw, which makes it clear that in Colin Powell’s eyes if there wasn’t enough evidence for a second Security Council resolution, then there wasn’t enough evidence to justify the U.S. going it alone. [original emphasis] [...]
December 2nd, 2006 at 6:26 am