| Submit your comments on this article | ||||
| Home Front: Politix | ||||
| Powell to Congressman: let’s tango | ||||
| 2004-02-12 | ||||
| Under questioning by House Democrats, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Wednesday he was surprised U.N. and American inspectors did not find storehouses of hidden weapons in Iraq. But Powell told the International Relations Committee that "we presented what we believed the truth to be at the time." Powell testified that President Saddam Hussein’s apparent intent to develop and use weapons, his record of gassing his own people and his defiance of the United Nations all were — and remain — valid reasons for going to war to overthrow him. And the violations of the cease-fire, and the pointless wars with Iran and Kuwait, and the mass graves ... He said President Bush and he had relied on intelligence provided by CIA Director George Tenet, and the only serious question raised about the analysis since the war was whether Iraq had storehouses of weapons of mass destruction. "I don’t think anyone in America should think that President Bush cooked the books," Powell said. "The reason we told you there were stockpiles there was because we believed it to be true," Powell said. "We were surprised when they did not turn up." The Left never once considers the obvious: if GWB & Co. were lying about WMD, why didn’t they just plant the stuff at a few locations? But Reps. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y., Robert Melendez, D-N.J., Rep. Robert I Wexler, D-Fla., and Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, challenged Powell about the administration’s case, suggesting it may have been misleading from the outset. "Truth is the first casualty of war," Ackerman said. "I would contend truth was murdered before a shot was fired."
No, silly, that part was incorrect. There’s a difference. Powell fielded the assertions calmly, defending the president’s judgment and his own. Here it comes: But when Brown contrasted Powell’s military experience to Bush’s record with the National Guard, saying the president "may have been AWOL" from duty, Powell exploded. "First of all, Mr. Brown, I won’t dignify your comments about the president because you don’t know what you are talking about," Powell snapped.
Oh yes you do. "You made reference to the president," Powell shot back. Brown then repeated his understanding that Bush may have been AWOL from guard duty. Rat bastard. "Mr. Brown, let’s not go there," Powell retorted. "Let’s not go there in this hearing. If you want to have a political fight on this matter, that is very controversial, and I think it is being dealt with by the White House, fine, but let’s not go there." Donald Sensing wrote in his blog, "I just saw the video of this episode on cable news, and it was very evident that Powell was one step away from rolling his sleeves up and inviting Brown to step outside. The Congressmen retreated quick." I would have paid to see Powell fly over that table at the Congressman. | ||||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #20 I'd give a weeks pay to see someone clock Chuck Schumer. I can't stand that guy. |
| Posted by: Lil Dhimmi 2004-2-12 11:14:09 AM |
| #19 Ah ha! Thanks Steve!! My bet still stands! |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 10:00:05 AM |
| #18 Well, my definition of "stockpile" would be a bunker with a cache of hundreds or thousands of rounds of artillery rounds loaded with chemical agents. A couple of barrels of, say, old mustard gas would not be a "stockpile". It all depends on how you define something, you have to look behind the words. Like when the police say they found a "arsenal" including a "thousand rounds" of ammunition. The average person thinks "Oh my god!". A shooter thinks "What, they found a couple of bricks of .22 ammo? Big deal." |
| Posted by: Steve 2004-2-12 9:54:45 AM |
| #17 hey...wait just a dog gone minute here. If "stockpiles can be considered the little caches already found in mosques, schools, and hospitals...then when Colin says..."We were surprised when they did not turn up" it logically implies that he is referring to something other than that when he uses the word, "stockpiles". Judges?? |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 9:34:10 AM |
| #16 perhaps a more informed rantburger could clarify this "stockpile" issue for us. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 9:11:29 AM |
| #15 Jackal...hmm...that's a good point. Fact is, I don't really know what constitutes a "stockpile". But...we do know for a fact that they have already some barrels, so stockpiles must mean more than that. So, Powell's statement would be untrue if a stockpile can be considered just a couple of barrels or cyanide blocks. Well..if no one can do better than this, I may have to hit the tip jar on a technicality. But this statement isn't exactly the same as "Sadaam did not have any wmds". If it's true that they are just coming up dry, I think someone should be able to find something more conclusive than a hair-splitter like this. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 9:05:56 AM |
| #14 B, that's questionable. "Stockpiles" doesn't necessarily mean a huge ammo dump. The little caches of weapons in mosques, schools, and hospitals (why are there no prosecutions for these war crimes?) are "stockpiles." It may sound like hair-splitting, but how many weapons constitute a "stockpile?" If it's "a lot," then above quote doesn't get Fred paid. If it's "more than one," I'm listening for the ka-ching. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2004-2-12 8:26:18 AM |
| #13 Sigh...still no quote, but the good news is that after reading this article, I think I finally figured this out. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE STOCKPILES, STUPID!! Powell says: "The reason we told you there were stockpiles there was because we believed it to be true," Powell said. "We were surprised when they did not turn up." I think that what this will boil down to is "stockpiles". They expected to find "stockpiles" but they did not. Oh...they found plenty of WMD's alright, just not "stockpiles" of them. Instead what they found was small mobile labs, and lots of WMD's buried in gardens and hidden in homes. Didn't they just find that big cyanide block in a home? I'm just guessing, but the fact that they didn't catch that this idea of individuals hiding bits and pieces in their homes/businesses is how the intelligence failed. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 8:17:51 AM |
| #12 Powell be Da Man. |
| Posted by: dataman1 2004-2-12 7:56:43 AM |
| #11 come on help me out here!!....I actually need to hit Fred's tip jar as I haven't done it in a long time. With all this hype about poor intelligence and the entire DU blogging 24/7 about Bush lied/people died - are they really so foolish that not a single quote to be found???? |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 7:23:19 AM |
| #10 I'd like to note that my $20 bet is still open (proceeds to Fred's tip jar). if anyone locates a quote from a senior administration official stating we have not found WMD's in Iraq. I pointed out yesterday that in these exchanges with Powell, there are no quotes even though the reporters worked hard on the copy to make it appear that the are. Same with the GW interview. $20 on the line for anyone who can give me a quote from the likes of GW, Powell, Rumsfeld, Cheny, Franks, etc ( must be serious source, in a position to know - ie: Scott Ritter and partisan hacks don't count. I'll be the judge of that, but I'm reasonable.). |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 7:15:48 AM |
| #9 Evert Visser - Can't you see? NMM is a BIG man. How do I know? NMM spends his entire life, running around letting everyone know how he is sooo much bigger and better and smarter than the US president and all of the other men who have achieved success. If they are smaller than him, he must be big. |
| Posted by: B 2004-2-12 7:02:00 AM |
| #8 Once more NMM: If Bush lied, so did Clinton. So did MI6. So did French, German, Russian and Chinese intelligence. EVERYBODY was wrong about Saddam's possesion of WMDs. And quite possibly, even Saddam himself may have thought he had them. But, the conclusion of your argument is troublesome. You complain about the war, and are saying that it was wrong to remove Saddam. Essentially what you are saying is that Saddam should still be in power, that the mass graves should still be open to his people, Qusay's plastic's shredder should still be running, and Uday should still have his "special arraignment" with jr. high school principles. Tell me again how your side cares so much more for the little guys, the ordinary Iraqi people than Bush does? You and your side would do nothing, did nothing for 8 years. And the Iraqi people suffered. |
| Posted by: Ben 2004-2-12 5:06:44 AM |
| #7 NMM Dont you ever get tired from repeating the same old s*** and never being able to contribute anything to a reasonable discussion? You must be a truly small person. |
| Posted by: Evert Visser 2004-2-12 4:26:41 AM |
| #6 I can't wait until Frank J. gets ahold of this article. Then builds another 'In My World' story about it at IMAO! Rumsfeld is usually the Strangler there. It'll be cool to read SecDef Powell flexing his chops. And pounding a few foreheads across mahogany desk tops!... BTW, let me know when NMM says something relevant! |
| Posted by: Jack Deth 2004-2-12 3:28:06 AM |
| #5 Here's something for you to repeat NMM: France, Clinton, Russia, Al Gore, the UN, Germany. What do they all have in common? They ALL believed that Iraq had WMDs. All of them, no exception. BTW: has it struck you yet that France, not exactly our pals these days, hasn't made an issue about the "WMD lies"? Guess why? Because THEY believed the weapons were there too. So here it is friend: either EVERYBODY lied or they were ALL fooled. Not too, that as the investigations into intelligence roll out here and the UK, and there are several that have already reported, including the congressional one mentioned in the posting earlier today and the UK "sexed up" story, and NONE has found that there was any manipulation of intelligence. NONE. If the Democrats are going to try and stand on this leg, they'll find that it's made of balsa. |
| Posted by: RMcLeod 2004-2-12 3:25:23 AM |
| #4 Repeat the lie Old Spook?! OK Repeat this: Iraq has weapons of mass destruction --repeat it in the State of the Union Address--send Condi out to Meet the Press to say the same thing--send Cheney out to repeat it--all lies---but wait a damn minute--the Repooplicans said it so suddenly it's not a lie |
| Posted by: NotMike Moore 2004-2-12 2:16:59 AM |
| #3 Medved played part of it today on his show. Way to go Sec. ABC news has really been a puppet in this whole (hole) low life attempt to frame the dialogue. If GW played poker, drank Brew 102, or chased tuna during his hitch, thats good enough for me as long as he got his Honorable. If Kerry had his boxers all in a twist, hated Johnson, Nixon, don't matter. What matters is who going to win this war. Antiwar thinks the war is either a farce or not worth fighting. So far that sounds like Kerry. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-2-12 1:34:23 AM |
| #2 I saw this on TV, it was great. Powell looked like a Man and Mr. Brown looked like a boy! He's da general! |
| Posted by: CobraCommander 2004-2-12 1:33:42 AM |
| #1 This is a Democrat tactic: repeat a lie often enough and people will start believing it, no matter what the facts are to the contrary. Its time to sue these bastards for slander. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-2-12 12:53:31 AM |