I got some new dirt to add to this thread.

Powell calls pre-Iraq U.N. speech a 'blot' on his record

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday his prewar speech to the United Nations accusing Iraq of harboring weapons of mass destruction was a "blot" on his record.

I'm the one who presented it to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It is painful now," Powell said in an interview with Barbara Walters on ABC-News.

The presentation by the soldier-diplomat to the world body in February 2003 lent considerable credibility to President Bush's case against Iraq and for going to war to remove President Saddam Hussein.

In the speech, Powell said he had relied on information he received at Central Intelligence Agency briefings. He said Thursday that then-director George Tenet "believed what he was giving to me was accurate."

But, Powell said, "the intelligence system did not work well."

"There were some people in the intelligence community who knew at the time that some of those sources were not good, and shouldn't be relied upon, and they didn't speak up," Powell said.

"That devastated me," he said.

Powell in the TV interview also disputed the Bush administration's linking of Saddam's regime with terrorists.

He said he had never seen a connection between Baghdad and the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001. "I can't think otherwise, because I'd never seen evidence to suggest there was one," he said.

Still, Powell said that while he has always been a "reluctant warrior" he supported Bush on going to war the month after his U.N. speech. "When the president decided that it was not tolerable for this regime to remain in violation of all those U.N. resolutions I am right there with him with the use of force," Powell said.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...ell-iraq_x.htm

This is very interesting, and I think gives a full answer to my question. I wonder what he thinks of the 9/11 Commissions conclusions according to which those connections were real. The rest in undisputable. Thank you Doody this was superinteresting.

I'm beginning to think he may be posturing for a possible run at national office, very interesting.

The problem is that a Military Man will say what he thinks is right, a politician will say what will get him re-elected. Now having spent most of his adult life in the military he may just find it hard to bend the truth like a politician.

I love Powell, but I think he got butt fo*ked by some people who has other intentions at the time.

I dont like Condi.

She should have warned the president about the bad intelligence of Saddam's WMD, but she has not done a good job on that.

Originally Posted by Italian Guy

One of the most agreed upon news story these days is that Mr Powell is likely to leave the Administration. Maybe to be replaced by Condi.
The one thing I dont understand is why. Is he just wanting to leave? Thanks.

although this is quite old news but Powell was too soft on issues where they needed a tough person.

Condi is just about fine.

Powell should be an actor.
Not only at the UN for sure...

Originally Posted by pupu

Powell should be an actor.
Not only at the UN for sure...

can you explain your position with a little bit more detail?

also, please report to the welcome center to properly introduce yourself to everyone at the forum.

I feel sorry for Powell.

Having to present that bogus report to the UN knowing it was bogus must have been very distasteful. What I never understood is why Powell was the one who had to deliever it. Why didnt one of the 'true believers' do it instead of sending an errend boy. Lack of faith?

Powell should have refused to do it and resigned.

As for Condi, well I have to admit shes doing better than I thought she would. I thought she would get steamrolled by Cheney and Rummy the way Powell was the moment she took office. Appearently (so far) she is doing a good job keeping them out of the State Department. I wonder how she would have reacted had it been her and not Powell at the UN.