Powell admits some intelligence intentionally misleading

[acludem]

Here's the story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4997766/

There is dissension within the ranks of the Bush administration. Colin Powell obviously does not expect to be brought back for a second term as Sec. of State if Bush wins.

acludem

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by acludem
There is dissension within the ranks of the Bush administration. Colin Powell obviously does not expect to be brought back for a second term as Sec. of State if Bush wins.

acludem

I am confused as to how you get from that article that there is dissension in the ranks and the Powell "obviously does not to be brought back for a second term..."

As is clearly stated in the article:

Powell continued: “At the time that I made the presentation, it reflected the collective judgment, the sound judgment of the intelligence community. But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and, in some cases, deliberately misleading.”

The article then goes on to say:

. . . . said that most of the evidence came from an Iraqi defector code-named "Curveball.” . . . . According to newspaper accounts, U.S. officials didn't know the defector's name until after the war, when they learned that he was a brother of one of the top aides of Ahmad Chalabi, the Iraqi exile who was an important advocate for the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Powell is just stating a fact that others in the administration have acknowledged. I think you are reading too much into this!

 

[acludem]

Powell also overruled an aide who tried to stop the interview. He said these things in contradiction to what has come out of the rest of the Bush administration. That's how you can tell there is dissension.

acludem

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by acludem
Powell also overruled an aide who tried to stop the interview. He said these things in contradiction to what has come out of the rest of the Bush administration. That's how you can tell there is dissension.

acludem

lol, you are digging now. The aide turned the camera because the allotted time was over. And that was from Russert (the interviewer) during an interview that he did today. Russert said, "we were over our time limit and the Secretary was on a tight time schedule, it is NOT UNCOMMON for such things to happen, but the Secretary was gracious and agreed to complete the interview even though WE overstepped our allotted time..."

Russert admitted that the incident could have been edited out as it was a taped interview, but he kept it in to show how gracious the Secretary was in completing the interview.

 

[acludem]

Actually you are wrong...if you read the transcript of the interview which you can do here http://countdown.msnbc.com you here the aide saying that "they can't use it...they're editing it". It had nothing to do with time, it had to do with the fact that Powell was saying the wrong things.

acludem

 

[freeandfun1]

According to Russert on Hannity yesterday they were speaking of time when she said, "they are editing it". She had no idea how he was going to reply, so why would she assume? Even Russert said it had to do with the fact he had gone over his time limit. So call him a liar if you want, but I believe him.

....State Department press aide Emily Miller fumed as Tim Russert went beyond the 10 minutes allotted for the NBC Sunday session.....

....13 minutes in to the interview, Miller attempted to pull the plug.

....Russert aired the exchange unedited.

Powell was 45 minutes late to the taping, a top source explained.....

.....(END OF PRE-TAPE INTERVIEW)

MR. RUSSERT: AND THAT WAS AN UNEDITED INTERVIEW WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE, TAPED EARLIER THIS MORNING FROM JORDAN.

WE APPRECIATE SECRETARY POWELL'S WILLINGNESS TO OVERRULE HIS PRESS AIDES' ATTEMPT TO ABRUPTLY CUT OFF OUR DISCUSSION AS I BEGAN TO ASK MY FINAL QUESTION.

LINK

 

[Comrade]

If I understand the original post is this that Powell has a new story perfectly in lockstep with the Democratic view?

We all know how much at odds he's been with the administration since day one. But it just strikes me as odd that anyone with an anti-Bush agenda is going to really use Powell as a source for the WMD issue (at least until he retires AND doesn't sell any books).


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,88863,00.html



"

Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical-weapons agent. We have no indication that Saddam Hussein has ever abandoned his nuclear weapons program.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SNOW: Do you still stand by each of those statements?

COLIN POWELL, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Yes. I spent -- not only have I been studying this for many, many years, but, as I prepared that statement, I worked very closely with the director of central intelligence, George Tenet...

SNOW: Who was sitting right behind you.

POWELL: Sitting right behind me.

That statement was vetted thoroughly by all of the analysts who are responsible for this account. We spent four days and nights out at the CIA, making sure that whatever I said was supported by our intelligence holdings. Because it wasn't the president's credibility and my credibility in line, it was the credibility of the United States of America.

And we are sure of what we said, because he does have this kind of capability.

Now, suddenly this week there's a big firestorm about, well, we haven't found anything yet. Well, we are going to intensify our search.

In my statement, I also said they are masters of deception and hiding. So we are sending in an Iraqi survey group of 1,300 people who will be looking in all the places, they'll be exploiting all the documents, they'll be interviewing people.

And I would put before you exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. Now, people are saying, well, are they truly mobile biological labs? Yes, they are.

POWELL: And the DCI, George Tenet, director of central intelligence, stands behind that assessment.

And my best justification for the fact that they are -- well, he said they were biological labs -- is, if they were not biological labs, I can assure you, the very next morning, the Iraqis would have pulled them out and presented them to UNMOVIC and presented them to the whole international press corps to demonstrate what they were, if they weren't that.

SNOW: So you have no doubt that there were weapons before the war. How about now?

POWELL: There can be no question there were weapons before the war. They have had weapons throughout their history. They have used chemical weapons. They have admitted that they had biological weapons. And they never accounted for all that they had or what they might or might not have done with it."


He's been on the record well after the "Mission Accomplished" speech and still backed the intelligence 100%. A change of heart at this moment, signifies he's only come begging for handouts ala Bob Woodward

 

[freeandfun1]

The conservative talk shows, etc. had to jump on this yesterday as they knew the mainstream media was going to do just as the author of this thread has done.... try to make the incident look like Powell is on the outs with the admin and being "controlled".

If one would look for sources other than CNN or MSNBC, they might find the truth. But then again, the left usually only looks for what they "want" to hear.

 

[insein]

its been stated before that the reason the president has Pwoell around is because he has different POV on certain situations. IF you have advisers that always agree with you, then why have advisors? This is not dissension. This is having a cabinet that can effectively advise you through a crisis. Something you wouldnt know about after 8 years of clintons "top notch" advisors.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by insein
its been stated before that the reason the president has Pwoell around is because he has different POV on certain situations. IF you have advisers that always agree with you, then why have advisors? This is not dissension. This is having a cabinet that can effectively advise you through a crisis. Something you wouldnt know about after 8 years of clintons "top notch" advisors.

Exactamundo. Bush made sure he has not surrounded himself with "yes men" as Clinton did.

 

[Palestinian Jew]

This is exactly what I've been saying all along! The Bush admin willingly mislead the public. I do believe that the war in iraq will rightly cause bush to lose the election.

This also gives more credibility to Woodward's book. It comes as no surprise to those of us that read it that Powell was not on board with the intelligence and that he felt it was wrong.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
This is exactly what I've been saying all along! The Bush admin willingly mislead the public. I do believe that the war in iraq will rightly cause bush to lose the election.

Huh? How do you get that from this thread?

 

[deaddude]

"The conservative talk shows, etc. had to jump on this yesterday as they knew the mainstream media was going to do just as the author of this thread has done.... try to make the incident look like Powell is on the outs with the admin and being "controlled".

If one would look for sources other than CNN or MSNBC, they might find the truth. But then again, the left usually only looks for what they "want" to hear."

It really is hard to find objective information these days. Your CONCERVATIVE talk shows are no less biased then CNN or MSNBC; they are merely the conservative view of the current situation. What one needs to do nowadays is get both the left and the right views on the situation and evaluate it for your self.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by deaddude
It realy is hard to find objective information these days. Your CONCERVATIVE talk shows are no less biased then CNN or MSNBC, it is merely the concervative view of the current situation. What one needs to do nowadays is get both the left and the right views on the situation and evaluate it for your self.

I agree (except for all the gramatical and spelling errors). My point was that the mainstream media will spin it one way and so, you have to watch more than one source to get your info.

CNN nor MSNBC interviewed Russert (the interviewer) about the incident. Shawn Hannity did. So therefore, I was able to hear straight from the original interviewer what happened.

I didn't just take a spoon fed spin on the topic and believe it. I looked for other sources to find out what really happened.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by deaddude
"The conservative talk shows, etc. had to jump on this yesterday as they knew the mainstream media was going to do just as the author of this thread has done.... try to make the incident look like Powell is on the outs with the admin and being "controlled".

If one would look for sources other than CNN or MSNBC, they might find the truth. But then again, the left usually only looks for what they "want" to hear."

It really is hard to find objective information these days. Your CONCERVATIVE talk shows are no less biased then CNN or MSNBC; they are merely the conservative view of the current situation. What one needs to do nowadays is get both the left and the right views on the situation and evaluate it for your self.

Goto foxnews and watch shows like hannity and colmes. You get both at the same time. BTW, the difference between Rush and Hannity is that they don't masquerade as Objective media like CNN and MSNBC do.

 

[acludem]

I don't need to look at another source, I watched the damn interview and then read the transcript. What other sources do you need for what happened?

Powell's aide was clearly trying to shut him up. Powell clearly does not agree with the Bush regimes tactics, especially when it was Powell they sent with this misinformation to the U.N.

acludem

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Originally posted by acludem
I don't need to look at another source, I watched the damn interview and then read the transcript. What other sources do you need for what happened?

Powell's aide was clearly trying to shut him up. Powell clearly does not agree with the Bush regimes tactics, especially when it was Powell they sent with this misinformation to the U.N.

acludem

If Powell is the only "voice of reason" and such a "stand up guy" in your eyes, do you really think he would have "gone up to the UN with this misinformation"? If he was so out of step with the rest of the administration wouldn't he have resigned by now? Keep reaching!

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by acludem
I don't need to look at another source, I watched the damn interview and then read the transcript. What other sources do you need for what happened?

Powell's aide was clearly trying to shut him up. Powell clearly does not agree with the Bush regimes tactics, especially when it was Powell they sent with this misinformation to the U.N.

acludem

Yes, but the transcript gives no reason as to why she did what she did. Russert very clearly stated.... he went over his time limit, Powell was already 45 min late, etc. You just want to believe what you want to believe and will ignore anything that PROVES otherwise. Typical.

 

[acludem]

It may have had to do with time, but it also had to do with what he was saying. Otherwise she wouldn't have said "they're not going to use that, they're going to edit it."

As for Powell's appearance at the U.N., he was mislead by Bush and Rumsfeld just like the rest of us.

acludem

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by acludem
It may have had to do with time, but it also had to do with what he was saying. Otherwise she wouldn't have said "they're not going to use that, they're going to edit it."

As for Powell's appearance at the U.N., he was mislead by Bush and Rumsfeld just like the rest of us.

acludem

The conspiracy is only in your head. Is your radio talking to you, even when it's off?