Point by point, a look back at a thick file...(Powell's UN lies)

Point by Point, a Look Back at a 'thick' File, a Fateful Six Months
Later The Most Detailed U.S. Case for Invading Iraq Was Laid
By Charles J. Hanley The Associated Press
Published: Aug 9, 2003



http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAO4TLT5JD.html

On a Baghdad evening last February, in a stiflingly warm conference room
high above the city's streets, Iraqi bureaucrats, European envoys and
foreign reporters crowded before a half dozen television screens to hear
the reading of an indictment.

"There are many smoking guns," Colin Powell would say afterward.

For 80 minutes in a hushed U.N. Security Council chamber in New York,
the U.S. secretary of state unleashed an avalanche of allegations: The
Iraqis were hiding chemical and biological weapons, were secretly
working to make more banned arms, were reviving their nuclear bomb
project. He spoke of "the gravity of the threat that Iraq's weapons of
mass destruction pose to the world."

Read it, now. Powell's 17 reasons why we had to attack Iraq immediately. And every single one of those 17 reasons is either untrue or unproven.

This is the death knell for Colin. He's toast after this.

I'm not holding my breath. Suffice it to say that I hope you're right.

On edit: Hey Newsjock, was that you that was talking about this report a couple of days ago?

Yes, this was the report I alerted y'all to earlier this week.

Us newspaper types have known about this story for a couple of days now -- we had it in hand, but it was embargoed for Sunday release. We've had time to consult with top editors, plan for extra space, and all that stuff.

The result: At my paper, at least, it's running across the TOP of the Sunday front page, with a huge point-by-point display inside. Other papers will have a similar opportunity.

It will be interesting to see how many papers seize the opportunity.

Do you mean to say that major daily papers are planning to carry this story so prominently? I do hope that's true.

AP distributed it for publication in Sunday papers, not before. But with the "Sunday news cycle" officially started, that's cleared the way for websites to start distributing it.

I'm still waiting for someone, anyone in this evil administration to get toasted. But I won't hold my breath.

for effective burrial. Maybe tomorrow we should have a thread: where was the UN story in your local paper? I'd really want to know.

http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages

Front pages from about 200 papers from the U.S. and worldwide, available in smallish JPGs and fully-readable PDFs.

It's surprising how many "smaller" papers are on display there.

relatives, right and left wing. Let's hope it is given it's due.

Every member of the US Congress should be required to read this report of Colin "Goebbals" Powell's "stunt" pulled off before the United Nation and the world. Many of us here saw through this fraud at the time of presentation, so what does this tell you about your elected 'leaders'? They lie !

Something tells me that Dumbya won't be resting so easily after this weekend!:evilgrin:

Dumbya won't be resting so easily after this weekend!

Only if he finds someone to read him all the really big words in this report.

It looks like a half dozen interviews at the UN would have enhanced the American press reports of Powell's dog and pony show. Three or four extra paragraphs would have told the story.

and it is HUGE.....That smoking gun is Powell's criminally fraudulent report. The Blood of Thousands is on the bush*/republican party's hands.

and it is HUGE.....That smoking gun is Powell's criminally fraudulent report. The Blood of Thousands is on the bush*/republican party's hands.

What's disgusting is that NONE of it is true. It's amazing that not a single one of Powell's assertions proved to be reliable. It was all projection or exaggeration or wishful thinking or guessing or supposition or just plain old bull. Was Powell fooling himself? As it turns out, Powell, not Cheney or Rummy or Wolfie, turned out to be the most dangerous and treacherous of the lot, not because he lied but because he abused our trust in him and used his credibility to deceive so many people into believing it.

They use him as thugs use a consigliere - because he can wear a suit and talk all pretty when defending their dirty deeds.
Of course, we all knew at the time that it was all lies. The UN knew that too (which is why they never agreed to permit this - but we went anyway). But in this country his performance was at first carefully choreographed (I remember polls on his credibility as opposed to W's right before this stunt0. And then the gushing of the media after the spectacle. It's so sad this news comes after the fact...We could have avoided a war...

would not put the niger and uranium claim in his presentation. "Wasn't deemed reliable"

The truth of the matter is, I would have liked to see those documents up on the overhead for the world to disseminate. He didn't use the uranium lie because he didn't have documentation that he could allow anyone to see.

I thought he was one of the "ok" guys.

PS They all are going to go the whole pack of rats

http://middleeastreference.org.uk/powell030205.html

I hope this help turns the tide against b**h, but I will always hold our shameful, greedy, and inept media responsible for this war.
b**h told the lies, but these cowards allowed the public to believe them.
It will be bitter irony if the public doesn't believe this "new information" now.

...reading all this stuff, so much of which any reasonably attuned DUer was aware of either at the time of Powell's speech or shortly thereafter. I don't feel this is really something to feel self congratulatory about. It's not an "I told you so" feeling so much as, I dunno, just feeling deeply deeply tired at watching the farce go on and knowing--knowing--that all of this could have been avoided if we'd had a reasonably responsible and critical newsmedia for the last six months--hell, the last three years.

I mean, thanks Mr. Hanley. I guess. Better late than never.

Ain't that the truth though? Anti-war folks all last spring here and elsewhere were refuting the claims. To be true there were a few press sources and commentaters that were questioning the motives of the admin. But all those protesters, all our former allies, were right weren't they?

They were awful vocal at the time, why are they so silent now?

Name one

I am just nearly drained of energy when another person finally admits to having doubts about the administration's arguments for war. At a time when I should be seizing the opportunity to give more information to people who are finally willing to listen, it's getting harder and harder to resist the temptation to just say " Gee, do you really think His Majesty could be a liar? Imagine that!" I need a new attitude.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the story tomorrow morning!

:kick:

I have been trying to find a way to articulate that same thing. I just din't have all of the comments and statistics that the newspapers have at their disposal.

hearing that this story will be in Sunday papers across the country almost brings tears to my eyes.

it deserves a :kick:

question for newsguy: does the WH have access to the same headsup that news rooms do? Did they know of this story in advance?

Any weasel can read the unfiltered AP wire with just a trivial effort. (But, please, don't ask how.)

...but like every other "this is it! drip, drip" news event, I fear this will get a little play and than just fade away. Fade away like every other damn scandal that would have had Republicans calling for Clinton's head, but just gets excused since the coup.

This is great work by the AP, and I want to get excited, but I know where this is going...nowhere.

contemptuous piece in the region section about "anarchists, environmentalists and pacifists" who think bush is "their archnemesis". Coming from the paper who lied the most about the WMD on the day where the lies are exposed this is some chutzpa!

I've been checking the online images of Sunday front pages from the East Coast -- and I've seen this story on only one paper, in Savannah, Ga.

I fear it might sink into the memory hole. :( :(

Funny, WP has an editorial about how Gore lied - no one ever said the danger was imminent! (Rose garden speech: they can get us in 45 minutes notwithstanding). The karl offensive is at work. Everything you heard and seen a few month ago - it was a dream

What's up with the lack of attention? I, too, thought it would be a major story today based upon reading this thread and the Tampa Bay article yesterday. This morning on Washington Journal Steve whats-his-name did briefly mention it while going over the news articles. It was a sidebar piece and he didn't nearly convey the true contents -- that 17 separate threats posed by Colin Powell to the UN have been pretty much shown to be completely false. Very disheartening.

Wow! That's great! Thank you for the link, I hadn't seen it and am gratified to see the number of publications that printed it. Here's hoping * gets his.

My only conplaint is that the buck stops with Colin Powell, not Bush. I guess he must be planning to leave so the administration is piling on before he goes.