Posted on 12/17/2005 6:14:13 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
Shhhhhhhhhh! It's a seeeequit. Don't tell da wabbit. It'll be a surpwize.
Uh...heh...heh..."only joking."
Heh.
LOL! Still?
Man, what a scandal! The President, Vice-President, and Secretary of Defense "hijacked" US military and foreign policy! Seriously, you think these bozos every read what they write before it's published?
One focussed, single issue is myopic to the nth degree.
For instance, my brother who saw combat as a chopper pilot in Viet Nam was pro life for Americans. With the combatants, he was pro-choice and gave orders to kill the combatants.
Mr Powell's comments follow US President George W. Bush's acceptance earlier this week of responsibility for going to war on intelligence, much of which "turned out to be wrong".
Colon Bowell is trying to distance himself from the "scandal-plagued" administration, so that he can still be acceptable to the lecture circuit...
US administration was never told of doubts about the secret intelligence used to justify war with Iraq
And why is Bowell, who was once National Security Advisor, running to a hostile foreign news service with tales of strife inside the locker room?
For his part, Mr Powell considered the US military could not be deployed in Iraq at its current strength for years to come
And there's a key phrase - for HIS part - this is all about damage control to Bowell's reputation...
Mr Powell confirmed that White House "hawks" US Vice-President Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had bypassed him and other colleagues on occasions.
As if Colon Bowell was the final arbiter of all things international.
And finally, here's The Money Shot:
Mr Powell's former chief-of-staff Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson made the damning allegations last month, accusing Cheney and Rumsfeld of running a "cabal" and hijacking US military and foreign policy.
Another knife in the back from the Clinton holdouts at State and CIA - the old "BushCO/Haliburton" conspiracy Trojan gets another life cycle, and Colon Bowell, a darling of the left only slightly less than McCain, gets a chance to appear noble and detached from EvilBoosh.
You have to remember that this view of Iraq (that it had WMD) was held during the Clinton administration and didn't change in the Bush administration.
________________________________________________________
Maybe Hillary and Bill hid them in Sandy Berger's pants. Stranger things happened during the Clinton White House years...
Even Powell seems to recognize that one McCain at a time is all we can take.
_________________________________________________________
Or maybe he is seeing his actions as they appear to others.
Being pro-life doesn't mean being stupid enough to turn the other cheek to an armed enemy determined to kill you.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot???!!!
Notwithstanding the opening sentence that "the Administration" was not told, the rest of the article takes great pains to mention that Rumsfeld was the evil bloodsucker that "bypassed" Powell, and that conversations were "unpleasant" (read scary for anti-war crowd.)
Am I just that jaded now?
Well, here's hoping Bush's tv address is a winner.
"Valerie Plame a WMD analyst at the CIA. The WH did not know of CIA WMD concerns, something that should have come from her desk.... "
BINGO!
Once again the dots connect.
However, despite everything that is happening on this planet, your only deciding factor is what?
Thanks for the ping to this; I'd have missed it otherwise, kayak.
I'll save it to my files for future use. What I'd love to know is if Powell really thinks the intel was bad, or if he thinks the weapons were moved to Syria but can't say for a variety of reasons.
Nearly all the head guys put in charge of finding the WMD have said they have credible evidence that WMD were moved to Syria before 3/03. In fact, Powell himself showed satellite photos to the UN that showed convoys of trucks leaving known WMD sites in Iraq for the Syrian border.
Maybe someday we'll know.
After years of hearing "Bush lied" etc., Powell finally comes clean about it? Sure took him long enough.
My only deciding factor as relates to being pro-life, is that revering the life of the absolutely pure and innocent, does not neccessarily obligate one to extend the same to all living things without any reservations whatsoever.
You got it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.