Maybe, but I’m not sure it’for everyone….

Follow orders.

Or not.

Wilkerson quit, and said why. Powell is still doing whatever Powell does, but his cred is forever destroyed. He will say in his autobiography that he was a “good soldier” and served the administration by doing what they told him to do, about which he will forever carry shame.

Powell isn’t the architect of the Iraqi genocide. I simply regard him as a messenger, and don’t hold him responsible. He and his conscience can wrestle with the degree of complicity he holds.

Meanwhile, I have a speaking offer for 200000 euros for George Bush, in Amsterdam, they rilly wanna hear you, dude, just come on over and, hey don’t mind those cops that just arrested you and sent you up to the International Criminal Court, that’s just a formality.

Caps lock key, just to the left of the “A” key. Press once. There ya go. Thanks!

So why won’t the republicans stop yapping about what Pelosi did or didn’t know and get down to some actual business? They’re the ones creating the distraction.

tearing this country apart right now takes our mind off what the democrats are not doing for us in dc. duh

Many a comrade says Powell should have resigned, but that he would be “leaving the troops” behind.

He was portrayed as a McAuther., when he told Bush the Bull in a Pottery Barn thing, he should have left the building ahead of Elvis.

Classic.

I was in London when he did that speech at the UN..it was immediately in the papers there that the intelligence was cooked up bullshit..in fact i have kept the articles in my files..

Powell is a damn liar! AND A MURDERER IN MY BOOK!

It was in European Media and press for a long time that the trucks were for weather Balloons, and yet Powell stayed silent to the American people and our soldiers who were being prepared to go to war..he is a lying sack of trash ( and I am being kind)

It was also in the European media and papers that the trucks were bought from the British by Saddam..did Powell even attempt to tell the American people the truth..hell no..he let soldiers go to war based on his own freaking lies and he knew it then and he damn well knows it now..that blood is on his hands and all the attempts of rehabbing his legacy is a damn joke!

I am going to post this in it’s entirety because the article may no longer exist:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

UK war dossier a sham, say experts
British ‘intelligence’ lifted from academic articles

Michael White and Brian Whitaker
The Guardian,
Friday 7 February 2003 09.49 GMT
Article history

Downing Street was last night plunged into acute international embarrassment after it emerged that large parts of the British government’s latest dossier on Iraq – allegedly based on “intelligence material” – were taken from published academic articles, some of them several years old.
Amid charges of “scandalous” plagiarism on the night when Tony Blair attempted to rally support for the US-led campaign against Saddam Hussein, Whitehall’s dismay was compounded by the knowledge that the disputed document was singled out for praise by the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, in his speech to the UN security council on Wednesday.

But diplomats will be trying to determine over the next few days whether it is a token gesture or a real shift away from what they describe as Iraq’s “catch us if you can” approach to inspections. Hours before the announcement, a Foreign Office source in London signalled that this was the kind of change of heart that Iraq would have to make to avoid war.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/feb/08/politics.iraq
Downing St admits blunder on Iraq dossier
Plagiarism row casts shadow over No 10′s case against Saddam

Michael White, Ewen MacAskill and Richard Norton-Taylor
The Guardian,
Saturday 8 February 2003 00.35 GMT
Article history

Downing Street yesterday apologised for its failure to acknowledge that much of its latest dossier on Iraq was lifted from academic sources, as the affair threatened to further undermine confidence in the government’s case for disarming Saddam Hussein.
MPs and anti-war groups were quick to protest that other features of Whitehall’s information campaign are suspect at a time when MI6 and other intelligence agencies are privately complaining at the way No 10 has been over-egging intelligence material on Iraq.

It emerged yesterday that the dossier issued last week – later found to include a plagiarised section written by an American PhD student – was compiled by mid-level officials in Alastair Campbell’s Downing Street communications department with only cursory approval from intelligence or even Foreign Office sources.

Though it now appears to have been a journalistic cut and paste job rather than high-grade intelligence analysis, the dossier ended up being cited approvingly on worldwide TV by the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, when he addressed the UN security council on Wednesday.

Downing Street yesterday toughed it out, insisting that what mattered was that the facts contained in the document were “solid” and helped make the case Tony Blair rammed home on BBC Newsnight. But the middle section of the dossier, which describes the feared Iraqi intelligence network, was taken, much of it verbatim, from the research of Dr Ibrahim al-Marashi without his knowledge or permission.

“In retrospect we should have acknowledged [this]. The fact that we used some of his work does not throw into question the accuracy of the document as a whole, as he himself acknowledged on Newsnight last night, where he said that in his opinion the document overall was accurate,” the No 10 spokesman conceded. “We all have lessons to learn,” he added. The four officials originally named on the website version of the 19-page dossier include Alison Blackshaw, Mr Campbell’s senior assistant, and Murtaza Khan, described as a news editor on the busy Downing Street website.

Professor Michael Clark, director of the International Policy Institute at King’s College London, said presenting such intelligence material “invalidates the veracity” of the rest of the document. The shadow foreign secretary, Michael Ancram, called for a cabinet minister to oversee government information on Iraq.

Even before the latest row some Whitehall officials were protesting that MI6 and other intelligence material was being used selectively by Downing Street. A well-placed source made it clear that the dossier had been the work of Downing Street and the Coalition Information Centre, the body set up after September 11 to put the US-British case on the war against terrorism. The source dismissed a key section of the dossier as full of “silly errors”.

Glenda Jackson, the Labour former minister, was one of several MPs to protest that the government was misleading parliament and the public. “And of course to mislead is a parliamentary euphemism for lying,” Ms Jackson told Radio 4′s Today programme.

Dr al-Marashi expressed “surprise” at the lack of a credit for his work, as did other authors whose research was quickly identified. One anti-war group, Voices in the Wilderness, identified a passage from No 10′s September dossier directly traceable to Saddam Secrets, a book by Tim Trevan published in 1999.

The Middle East Review of International Affairs, from which Dr al-Marashi’s work was lifted, is based in Israel, which makes it a suspect source to even moderate Arab opinion, and another reason why the origin of the information should have been listed.

In Whitehall one official who regularly sees MI6 reports said that Britain’s knowledge about Iraq until recently had been very poor. But another claimed there has been a recent transformation: “What has happened in the last nine months is that there is now strong intelligence coming through.”

Disturbing reports

The government has issued three reports in the past six months, trying to establish a case for action against Iraq. Each one has drawn progressively more criticism.

September The 50-page dossier Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Assessment of the British Government relied heavily on input from the Foreign Office and MI6.

The material was damning, but most of it turned out to be years old. British journalists in Baghdad visited several “facilities of concern” highlighted in the report and found nothing sinister. UN weapons inspectors later visited the same sites and uncovered nothing.

December The 23-page Saddam Hussein: Crimes and Human Rights Abuses provided a horrifying account of abuses but was widely criticised by human rights groups, MPs and others for recycling old information.

At the launch, the Foreign Office had on the platform an Iraqi exile who had been jailed by President Saddam for 11 years. Later, he disclosed that handcuffs he had worn had been made in Britain.

January 30 Iraq: Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation, was a Downing Street production. The first sentence of the report said it was based on a number of sources, including intelligence material, but it turned out that much of it was lifted from academic sources. Glen Rangwala, an academic who blew the whistle on the dossier, said yesterday: “It really does cast doubt on the credibility of the intelligence that has been put to us.”

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/feb/15/iraq.usa/print
US claims on Iraq called into question
Inspectors pick holes in Powell allegations and call for patience in carefully coded message to council

Jonathan Steele
The Guardian, Saturday 15 February 2003 00.43 GMT

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
then he defended his bullshit ..when he knew he was exposed all over the world..he is a lying sac of trash in my book and a murderer..he will never be rehabed to me..i don’t care who tries it.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/09/1073437447036.html?from=storyrhs
Colin Powell defends US policy on IraqJanuary 9, 2004 – 9:46AM

Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged today that he saw no “smoking gun, concrete evidence” of ties between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terror network, but insisted Iraq had dangerous weapons and needed to be disarmed by force.

At a State Department news conference, Powell openly disagreed with a private think tank report which maintained that Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States, and defended the case he made before the United Nations for a US-led war to force Saddam from power.

“My presentation … made it clear that we had seen some links and connections to terrorists organisations over time,” Powell said.

“I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I do believe the connections existed.”

Three experts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace said in a report today that the Bush administration systematically misrepresented a weapons threat from Iraq, and US strategy should be revised to eliminate the policy of unilateral preventive war.

I really don’t know how he can say it, but on the outside chance he is, would you want to hear Nancy saying she was “informed but not briefed” unable to string a simple sentence together? Even if BO loaned her his TOTUS?

It wasamazing Bush trash his Intel community on National TV…so in that respect Nancy, Newt and Bush have something primal in common.