Here on Democratic Underground, we knew Cheney was lying, but most of us trusted Powell.

[PurgedVoter]

Here is the wonder that is Democratic Underground, if I say something that is clearly my opinion, I will be ignored, agreed with and argued with. If I say something that is wrong, I will be slammed up against the wall. We reach out with kindness and support. We come together and show solidarity. But falsehoods, or unsupported information, even if we really, really want to believe them, will get you slammed hard.

We don't like like lies and we don't like liars.

Back in the day when it became clear that congress was giving permission to Bush/Cheney to declare war, we were screaming in unison. We all knew better. This wasn't even contested. Lots of things were, but we read the reports from the UN and other sources. We shared them and we listened.

Sadly we knew the truth and yet congress was fooled. Sadly we knew that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and the Saudi's were in it deep.

The intelligence was out there and anyone paying attention knew Cheney's name from even earlier times. His name was like a brand that featured products like MK-Ultra and invisible submarines. Cheney was one of the few considered less trustworthy and more malevolent than Kissinger.

A lot of us however, and I am included in this, trusted Powell right up to the moment he decided to support the invasion of Iraq. After that a lot of us were able to see through the cracks. A lot of us discovered that the Powell we believed in was never really there.

[Pantagruel]

1. He had to have known

how flimsy the WMD evidence was and how influential his lies would be. He was bloodstained from that moment on.

[ret5hd]

2. He hadn't washed the blood of...

the My Lai Massacre coverup from his hands yet.

[pfitz59]

21. Beat me to it

Powell sold his soul decades ago.

[marble falls]

3. I think it's more nuanced than that. I think he realized he was misled after he had committed to ...

... remarks. I think he wasn't sure how much of what he knew was true or false. I thought he handled it as a high ranking military officer would have handled it as his level on the food chain required.

He later admitted, he had been a conduit for the big lie.

[qazplm135]

6. we don't know that

we just don't. It's an assumption.

[Celerity]

9. Neglecting Intelligence, Ignoring Warnings

January 28, 2004

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/news/2004/01/28/457/neglecting-intelligence-ignoring-warnings/

Downing Street memo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo

The Downing Street memo (or the Downing Street Minutes), sometimes described by critics of the Iraq War as the smoking gun memo, is the note of a 23 July 2002 secret meeting of senior British government, defence and intelligence figures discussing the build-up to the war, which included direct reference to classified United States policy of the time. The name refers to 10 Downing Street, the residence of the British prime minister.

The memo, written by Downing Street foreign policy aide Matthew Rycroft, recorded the head of the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) as expressing the view following his recent visit to Washington that "[George W.] Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." It quoted Foreign Secretary Jack Straw as saying it was clear that Bush had "made up his mind" to take military action but that "the case was thin." Straw also noted that Iraq retained "WMD capability" and that "Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN." The military asked about the consequences "if Saddam used WMD on day one," posing Kuwait or Israel as potential targets. Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith warned that justifying the invasion on legal grounds would be difficult. However, the meeting took place several months before the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, the resolution eventually used as the legal basis for the invasion of Iraq. UNR687 also provided a pre-existing basis, as it required Iraq to divest itself of "100%" of all WMD capacity, which the Memo agreed it had not.

also, aside from that

Link to tweet

[qazplm135]

15. so I don't see anything there that says

Colin Powell knew definitively. I see certain evidence that he was warned that the evidence was not reliable or that it was not "compelling" or "no direct evidence" "not convincing" and words like that.

If you want to call him duped, incompetent, wrong, incurious, gullible, blinded, those are all pretty clear.

Saying you have direct evidence he knew and lied, well, that's not present in any of those links.

[Celerity]

17. He bloody well knew it was bullshit, he was not cut out of the loop, nor a dupe, nor gullible,

that is all revisionist hagiography/apologetics. His own State Department's intel said there were no WMD's on multiple occasions.

He knew the PNAC/Neocon types he was carrying water for, and carry their water he did, on the grandest of all world stages, at the UN.

The bottom line is simple:

Powell was a war criminal, he lied to give cover to an illegal war of aggression.

The Nuremberg Principles

In 1950, the Nuremberg Tribunal defined Crimes against Peace, in Principle VI, specifically Principle VI(a), submitted to the United Nations General Assembly, as:

Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under

[qazplm135]

20. No point

In continuing discussion since your mind is clearly made up.

We've been starting wars and aggressions on almost an annual basis across every administration. If that's the standard for war criminal then who isn't one?

Obama did drone strikes on multiple nations. Clinton attacked countries with missiles.

Hell I helped deploy people to Iraq in my Jon then deployed later which counts as planning and preparation and certainly waging, so guess I'm one too.

[JoeOtterbein]

4. Powell lied and many....

....babies, children, teens, twenty-something's, boomers and seniors, and many other suffered and expired needlessly.

[samplegirl]

5. He had his chance and he didnt

come clean. When will democrats quit making excuses for his kind?
I was done with him after he let them sell the American people WMD

[Skittles]

11. it's fucking sickening

now there is the usual lament about "grave dancing"

I guess excusing atrocities is the meme of the day

[hedda_foil]

7. Many of us knew it was BS.

We knew it was just a ploy to enact the plans of PNAC (Project for a New American Century) to topple the oil countries of the Middle East like dominoes in no time flat -- starting with Iraq -- and grab all the oil. Cheney had already assigned which oil company got which oil fields.

[ecstatic]

8. He's a human being who made a mistake alongside Biden, Clinton and the rest

who all voted for the war. He's not some magical figure. Everyone could have said NO, just like we did. Just like my congresswoman did before getting booted out of office.

[Skittles]

13. nope

THEY KNEW...and proceeded anyways. They voted their careers over their country.

[NewHendoLib]

10. I actually have never trusted a republican on anything. period.

From Reagan forward - if their lips move, they are lying. Period.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

23. this

[wellst0nev0ter]

12. Not me, and not the DU I was in

I was there, on this forum even. Powell's bullshit hearing and bullshit cartoons were debunked in real time by weapons inspectors on the ground. They already been to those sites mentioned by Powell, there were nothing there.

At the time, I actually thought Saddam at least had SOME banned weapons (not enough to justify the dumb fucking war) but there was really no there there. Fucking unreal.

[Skittles]

14. I certainly did NOT trust Powell

and I consider anyone who did to be quite the fool

[UTUSN]

16. Nope nip nah nunca

[CrackityJones75]

18. Most of us?

Fuck that. I am not in that company.

[CrackityJones75]

19. Seriously where the hell am I?

This is some unreal shit going on here today.

I am at a complete loss ar the things being thrown around.

[Fullduplexxx]

22. I didnt . I figured he caved to pressure when he did his little truck show

I was disappointed

[PurgedVoter]

24. And I thank the last several posters for proving my point.

If you say something that is wrong, on Democratic Underground, you are going to be shot down. While I wanted Powell to stand up against the lies and thought he might, I was among the few. Most knew him to be the war monger he was. The majority did not trust Powell. There are probably more here now that wish to think well of him than thought well of him back when there was hope that he might come out against PNAC's lies.

So here is the point. It is apparent that On Democratic Underground, you are more likely to see the truth than if you are in congress. The consensus here is not perfect, but it beats any other source I know.

[Hortensis]

25. Not so much here. Evaluating people by their actions protects,

at least somewhat, from falling for nice smiles and statements -- and for the protective puff and spin big public figures are usually wrapped in. Nice smiles and gentlemanly manners tend to trigger any memories of actions that conflict. The performance becomes an action to be evaluated itself, especially when seeking to deceive, which people whose past actions don't read well, or tend to be misunderstood, often do.

"Wow, just look at what a nice guy he is!"

And of course, examining people's actions means awareness of what should be respected, even admired. Protection against any urge to demonize or influence of articles born out of some current mood.

My problem is poor memory. I keep having to look back. Long histories like Powell's don't help. (Of course, another problem with long histories is that they always include things that look bad, or good, in simple-view and much different when even a few of the complexities are understood.)