Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Gabi Hayes

(28,795 posts)
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 10:02 PM Aug 2016

Why on earth would anyone take Colin Powell's word on ANYthing?

too bad Hillary can't call him out for the liar he always has been, going back to the My Lai coverup, all the way up to the "anthrax" vials during the UN dog and pony show.

his lies are infinitely worse than anything else she's spun

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/colin3.html



those are just for starters
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why on earth would anyone take Colin Powell's word on ANYthing? (Original Post) Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 OP
he lost his credibility when he became a Bush whore Skittles Aug 2016 #1
he lost his virginity over thirty years before that.....just another careerist fortune hunter Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #2
he lost his credibility in the attempted coverup of MyLai. niyad Aug 2016 #3
^^THIS^^ Stinky The Clown Aug 2016 #4
He "didn't remember" the conversation but confirmed he did, in fact, use his private email at times. 63splitwindow Aug 2016 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author MichiganVote Aug 2016 #6
and that's the real reason he didn't run in 96.....lawrence walsh would've Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #8
This message was self-deleted by its author MichiganVote Aug 2016 #11
how could I forget his role in iran/contra? Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #7
Let's start with My lai UTUSN Aug 2016 #9
that was the first link in my OP. robert parry is the george seldes of his generation Gabi Hayes Aug 2016 #10
Let's put it out there (from your link) : UTUSN Aug 2016 #12
Like butter.... LenaBaby61 Aug 2016 #13
There is a book SteelSmasher Aug 2016 #14
Thank you for that information MsLeopard Aug 2016 #15
John McCain erpowers Aug 2016 #16
 

Gabi Hayes

(28,795 posts)
2. he lost his virginity over thirty years before that.....just another careerist fortune hunter
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 10:07 PM
Aug 2016

nothing more, nothing less

circumstances just aligned to vault him over lots of other ambitious, lying thugs

he had a smooth veneer of respectability, much the same as McCain, another crooked sociopath (he's actually much more corrupt), and rode it as far as he could take it, til his ambition crashed upon Bushrocks '03

 

63splitwindow

(2,657 posts)
5. He "didn't remember" the conversation but confirmed he did, in fact, use his private email at times.
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 10:13 PM
Aug 2016

Is that just a coincidence?

"...
...
The IG report confirmed what we had previously written: Among Clinton’s predecessors, only Colin Powell (Jan. 20, 2001–Jan. 26, 2005)
used a personal email account for government business.
...
..."

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/a-guide-to-clintons-emails/

Response to Gabi Hayes (Original post)

 

Gabi Hayes

(28,795 posts)
8. and that's the real reason he didn't run in 96.....lawrence walsh would've
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 10:45 PM
Aug 2016

opened the iran/contra floodgates on his lying ass

Response to Gabi Hayes (Reply #8)

 

Gabi Hayes

(28,795 posts)
7. how could I forget his role in iran/contra?
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 10:43 PM
Aug 2016
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/colin6.html




Meanwhile, the White House was maneuvering into dangerous territory, too, in its policy toward Iran. The Israelis were interested in trading U.S. weapons to Iran to gain a strategic foothold in that Middle Eastern country -- and to enlist Iran's help in freeing American hostages in Lebanon.

Carrying the water for the Iran opening was national security adviser Robert McFarlane, who circulated a draft presidential order in late spring 1985. As always, the paper passed through Weinberger's "filter," Colin Powell. In his memoirs, Powell called the proposal "a stunner" and a grab by McFarlane for "Kissingerian immortality."

After reading the draft, Weinberger scribbled in the margins, "this is almost too absurd to comment on." Ironically, on the same day the Iran paper went out, Reagan declared that the United States would give no quarter to terrorism. "Let me further make it plain to the assassins in Beirut and their accomplices, wherever they may be, that America will never make concessions to terrorists," Reagan declared.

But in July 1985, Weinberger, Powell and McFarlane were actively meeting on details to do just that. Iran wanted 100 anti-tank TOW missiles that would be delivered through Israel, according to Weinberger's notes. Reagan gave his approval, though the White House wanted the shipments handled with "maximum compartmentalization" to prevent public disclosure.

On Aug. 20, 1985, the Israelis delivered the first 96 missiles to Iran, a pivotal moment for the Reagan administration. That missile shipment put the Reagan administration over the legal line, in violation of laws both requiring congressional notification for transshipment of U.S. weapons and prohibiting arms to Iran or any other nation designated a terrorist state. Violation of either statute could be a felony and an impeachable offense.

The available evidence from that period also suggests that Weinberger and Powell were very much in the loop on the operation, even though they may have opposed the policy. On Aug. 22, two days later, Israel notified McFarlane of the completed shipment. From aboard Air Force One, McFarlane promptly called Weinberger.
 

Gabi Hayes

(28,795 posts)
10. that was the first link in my OP. robert parry is the george seldes of his generation
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 10:53 PM
Aug 2016

or the izzy stone, if you will

UTUSN

(70,680 posts)
12. Let's put it out there (from your link) :
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 11:09 PM
Aug 2016

********QUOTE*******

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/colin3.html
.... [font size=5]Maj. Powell's Response[/font]

.... After that [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]cursory[/FONT] investigation, Powell drafted a response on Dec. 13, 1968. He admitted to no pattern of wrongdoing. Powell claimed that U.S. soldiers in Vietnam were taught to treat Vietnamese courteously and respectfully. The Americal troops also had gone through an hour-long course on how to treat prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions, Powell noted. ....

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Powell reported back exactly what his superiors wanted to hear[/FONT]. "In direct refutation of this (Glen's) portrayal," Powell concluded, "is the fact that relations between Americal soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent."

[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Powell's findings, of course, were false[/FONT]. But it would take another Americal hero, an infantryman named Ron Ridenhour, to piece together the truth about the atrocity at My Lai. After returning to the United States, Ridenhour interviewed Americal comrades who had participated in the massacre. ....

But[FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"] Powell's peripheral role[/FONT] in the My Lai cover-up [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]did not slow his climb up[/FONT] the Army's ladder. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Powell pleaded ignorance about the actual My Lai massacre[/FONT], which pre-dated his arrival at the Americal. Glen's letter disappeared into the National Archives -- to be unearthed only years later by British journalists Michael Bilton and Kevin Sims for their book Four Hours in My Lai. [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]In his best-selling memoirs, Powell did not mention his brush-off of Tom Glen's complaint[/FONT]. ....


... [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]Powell had proved himself the consummate team player.[/FONT]

********UNQUOTE********

LenaBaby61

(6,974 posts)
13. Like butter....
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 11:19 PM
Aug 2016

Wouldn't melt in his LYING mouth.

I guess the so-called "Liberal press" forgot about HIS role in front of the UN and on the world's stage concerning the illegal invasion of Iraq , in their attempt to tar and feather Hillary with the email non-controversy.

I have a friend whose a Democrat and who likes Powell and who thinks Hillary needed his endorsement for president, and I told her no she doesn't, she's doing fine WITHOUT him and his endorsement for POTUS.

SteelSmasher

(35 posts)
14. There is a book
Wed Aug 24, 2016, 11:29 PM
Aug 2016

called " Not Safe For War: The Definitive List, Ten Years On "
it's basically a list of people we shouldn't listen to, sort of a "boy who cried wolf principle" thing. They list Colin Powell and cite him as being extremely dangerous because most people have forgotten what he has done. He has managed to distance himself from his own actions which is something I think many people in that book would like to do.

erpowers

(9,350 posts)
16. John McCain
Thu Aug 25, 2016, 09:57 AM
Aug 2016

John McCain is another person who has been able to distance himself from his past. He was a member of the Keating Five, a group of five U.S. Senators who were accused of corruption in connection to the Savings & Loan scandal. After being acquitted of corruption charges McCain became a champion of campaign finance reform. McCain's role in the Keating Five is rarely brought up in the news media.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why on earth would anyone...