Printable View
Why is Powell now saying the intelligence may not have been from "solid sources" as he had assured last year to the UNSC? Or is it simply because the Bush government was so obsessed with invading Iraq it didn't bother to double and/or triple check the evidence it had gathered? Or maybe "let's invade anyway. We shall find out for sure later..."?
.
Yep!Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
Or maybe "let's invade anyway. We shall find out for sure later..."?
But, I still believe we don't know everything, that there are secret reasons only the higher ups truly know about.
:wave:
probably yes but this is a high profile admission if you ask me.
Higher ups? That only means Bush and the God, I guess :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by Something Else
Yep!
But, I still believe we don't know everything, that there are secret reasons only the higher ups truly know about.
:wave:
.
Why do you care Honeybee? You aren't even American are you? Why are you obsesed with Bush? He didn't attack India did he?
No but this is a forum regarding world events - of which Bush attacking countries without proper proof soundly fits in.Quote:
Originally posted by HardCode
Why do you care Honeybee? You aren't even American are you? Why are you obsesed with Bush? He didn't attack India did he?
Me obsessed with Bush? Hell no! There are better things to be obsessed with. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by HardCode
Why do you care Honeybee? You aren't even American are you? Why are you obsesed with Bush? He didn't attack India did he?
So only Americans are supposed to talk about Bush and his policies? Even when they affect the whole world? Interesting ... :)
.
I thought Powell was a liar? So how can you believe anything he says :pQuote:
Originally posted by honeybee
Me obsessed with Bush? Hell no! There are better things to be obsessed with. :rolleyes:
So only Americans are supposed to talk about Bush and his policies? Even when they affect the whole world? Interesting ... :)
.
X
So you accept that Powell was lying? Or is a liar? :pQuote:
Originally posted by Xanith
I thought Powell was a liar? So how can you believe anything he says :p
X
.
Not me. However you said he is, so why believe his admission now? :)Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
So you accept that Powell was lying? Or is a liar? :p
.
X
Bush and Powell are Cheney and Rummies puppets. Those two are the madmen at the wheel of this country. Powell dosn't know his arse from a hole in the ground. That is a proven fact.
Hey Georgie 1983 called, they want their cold war nutcases back!
So either then or now, Powell has been lying :) Still proves my point :)Quote:
Originally posted by Xanith
Not me. However you said he is, so why believe his admission now? :)
X
.
so you mean collin powel is lying about lying?Quote:
Originally posted by honeybee
So either then or now, Powell has been lying :) Still proves my point :)
.
He lied about the reasons to go to war against Iraq.Quote:
Originally posted by OrdinaryGuy
so you mean collin powel is lying about lying?
.
Did you know that Hillary Clinton publicly said that Ghandi worked at a gas station? It's true.
Ah - American education at it's best.....:p
Hardcode you are going to president someday:eek:
Hmm. Lied? More and more information is surfacing on handling of intelligence during Clintons reign and how they passed off a losing situation to Bushs administration.
Clinton was scared after Somalia to act. Hence how he let 1 million people be butchered in a year and ignored bin Laden that they considered a threat.
Democrats then wanted to pass the blame onto Bush for not acting on intelligence pre 9/11. It seems understandable that they acted on information on Iraq they received and deemed credible at the time with so much pressure on their backs from the Democrats. Wouldn't surprise me if this was more intelligence left over from the Clinton administration.
See how much different the story is when the entire book is read and not just the anti Bush spin?
I'm curious what the commissions mandate is. Is it to find out how this could happed so that it doesn't happen again, or is it to find someone to blame?
The commission is standard fare created by political pressure. No one really receives the blame. they hope it changes things. Never does! Same problem all over the world. Create a commission to find a cause to fix the problem, then only fix the visible problem, and ignore the other possible problems.
Yeah. I wondered what it was for. It seems that so much action has been taken since 11th Sept. that any further inquiry is hardly going to help matters. I do feel a bit sorry for Bush though. As much as I think he is a numpty, it's very easy to use hindsight to say "oh, he should have done this or that", but let's face it, who would have thought that such a terrorist attack was going to be carried out, or that the media would have latched onto it so ferverently.
It is interesting reading many of the americans on here discussing these issues. It often comes back to Democrat/Republican issues. oh Bush did this, well Clinton did that. There seems to be a lot of internal in fighting. Until I came to this site I couldn't have told you if Bush was a democrat or a Republican, and I very much doubt if your real enemy, Al-Quedia et al, gives a toss either. If this commission aportions blame to either government, it's still a minor victory for Al-queida, yet another casualty in the American camp, and almost all self-inflicted. I really think the repercussions of 11th Sept. are worse than the tragedy itself.
Right. Democrat or Republican is really a moot issue. The point I was trying to make is that everyone is trying to make the Bush administration the scap goat for all the current problems and when you look at the entire story, not just the current chapters, the story changes.
Implying that Colin Powell 'lied' is crap, when the information points to possible faulty intelligence handed down to them.
I don't think I'd use the term lied either. But I don't think you can blame the inteligence agency's totally either. I would say he misinterpreted the information because he desperately wanted to believe it to be true. Which, let's face it, we all do to a certain extent.Quote:
Originally posted by Cander
Implying that Colin Powell 'lied' is crap, when the information points to possible faulty intelligence handed down to them.
When he presented his "evidence" to the UN it was pretty much laughed out of the room as being totally circumstantial and easy to interpret one way or another.
- It's a truck parked next to building.
- No, it's a truck that's possibly being loaded with chemical weapons from that building which is possibly a chemical weapons factory...
-Er, or it's a truck that's possibly being loaded with ice-cream from that building which is possibly an ice-cream factory...
He came home furious that the UN wouldn't believe him, which to me pretty much proves that in his own mind he was telling the truth.
But it is Powell that interpreted the information? Was he just the messenger of intelligence?
I had always thought Powell was a better bull filter than he proved in this case.
Blaming either administration for 9/11 is sort of bogus, but not entirely. Clinton did try to get Osama, but there was no political will to do so. Had he done the wrong thing, hit the wrong target, he would have been roasted by the Republicans. However, he did try. The problem with Bush is there is fair evidence that he never did try. Sure, it wouldn't have altered 9/11, which was already in the works, and the failures there weren't of his doing, but his actions towards Iraq are certainly questionable. Considering his closest advisors were publicly calling for that move for at least a decade, we can't be surprised that he read what he wanted to into the information. He acted on faulty intelligence, but it was faulty intelligence that supported the action he was trying to take anyways.