Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 4 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 3 (7 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   13 comments

    OpEdNews Op Eds

Colin Powell: Conned or Con-Man?

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 5 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 3   Well Said 3   Supported 2  
View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H2 2/4/13

Become a Fan
  (136 fans)

This piece was reprinted by OpEdNews with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.

Cross-posted from Consortium News


Former Secretary of State Colin Powell. (Photo credit: Charles Haynes)

Ten years ago, Secretary of State Colin Powell addressed the United Nations in a speech which routed what was left of American resistance to the Bush/Cheney push for invading Iraq. The next day, the Washington Post's editorial pages spoke for the conventional wisdom, filled with glowing reviews of Powell's convincing arguments.

Today, of course, we know that much of what Powell said on Feb. 5, 2003, was wrong. He himself has acknowledged that the speech was a "blot" on his record.

We also know that then-CIA Director George Tenet and his deputy John McLaughlin knew full well that key data that they were giving Powell was highly dubious or outright fraudulent. It was not simply "mistaken," as George W. Bush and his careerist defenders still claim.

There is also circumstantial evidence that Powell was a willing co-conspirator, despite his repeated insistence that he didn't know he was spreading falsehoods to justify an aggressive (and thus illegal) war. It's clear that he was eager to please his bosses and thus was predisposed to do whatever he was told.

But the question remains: Was Powell a full-fledged participant in the fraud or was he duped by CIA officials who were taking direction from Vice President Dick Cheney and other war hawks? It seems to me likely that Tenet and McLaughlin (and in a larger sense Bush and Cheney) exploited Powell's long-held tendency toward careerism (or as his acolytes put it, "being a good soldier") to easily overcome Powell's misgivings.

From his days as a young officer in Vietnam through his long climb up the ladder of the U.S. national security bureaucracy, Powell never bucked the system. Indeed, that's the secret to understanding how Powell ascended to become a four-star general, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Secretary of State.

Whether the question was joining other early Vietnam military advisers in warning President Lyndon Johnson about the hopelessness of that conflict, or participating in President Ronald Reagan's illegal Iran-Contra operation, or finding less violent ways to deal with international disputes under President George H.W. Bush, Powell consistently chose to be a yes man and do what his bosses wanted. [For details on Powell's past, see the book, Neck Deep.]

Jury Still Out

Still, in my view, the jury is still out on whether Powell was more conned regarding the Iraq War than con-man. Like anyone else, he is entitled to some benefit of the doubt, though to this day he has resisted providing any comprehensive explanation of his deceptive speech or admitting that the invasion of Iraq was wrong.

Powell has limited himself to some hand-wringing about how the speech was a "blot" on his record, not that it contributed to the unnecessary deaths of nearly 4,500 U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. He still insists that the war was justified.

It's also true that Powell remains one of the important links in the chain of excuses used to fend off allegations of war crimes against the architects of the invasion. As long as each link in that chain doesn't admit wrongdoing and points to the link in the chain next to him or her as providing justification for whatever was done, no single link can be found guilty and surely not the entire chain.

The Bush-Cheney team used a similar chain of reinforcing justification to evade responsibility for illegal torture. The CIA's torturers point to authorization from the CIA brass, which points to approval from Bush and other senior White House officials, who point to the Justice Department lawyers who created legal excuses and other evasions, some of which were suggested by the CIA torturers, the CIA brass and the White House officials.

Thus, regarding the false testimony on the Iraq War, Powell resists stating clearly that Tenet and McLaughlin lied to his face or admitting that he agreed to deliver the deceptions with his trademark gravitas and sincerity because he wanted to stay in President Bush's good graces.

Slam or Sham Dunk?

Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff at the time, has described his boss as dubious about elements of the intelligence that he was getting from not only Vice President Cheney's office but from the CIA.

Surely, Powell understood that the intelligence on Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's links to Islamist terrorism was weak and that evidence of his "weapons of mass destruction" was far from a "slam dunk," as Tenet famously assured President Bush on Dec. 21, 2002. The appropriate adjective would have been sham, not slam.

Even Bush has said he was underwhelmed at McLaughlin's presentation of the evidence that day and put a must-do-better on the CIA's report card. So, with their wrists slapped at the White House, Tenet and McLaughlin returned to the CIA and redoubled their efforts to fulfill their role in this chain of self-reinforcing arguments for giving Bush and his neocon advisers their war of choice in Iraq.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was an Army infantry/intelligence officer and then a CIA analyst for 27 years, and is now on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). His (more...)
 

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

What's Hayden Hidin'?

Asylum for Julian Assange -- Former Awardee for Integrity

Petraeus Cons Obama on Afghan War

Obama Stands Up to Israel, Tamps Down Iran War Threats

Mullen Wary of Israeli Attack on Iran

Note to Nancy Pelosi: Colin Powell Got Snookered at CIA, too

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
13 people are discussing this page, with 13 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

click here... by Mark Sashine on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:44:24 PM
Ray,Greg Thielmann resigned from the State Departm... by Jana Nestlerode on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:45:07 PM
I think the most telling item on Powell's resume i... by Jim Arnold on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 5:53:46 PM
Who cares - they add up to the same thing - A... by Poor old Dirt farmer on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:14:47 PM
I thinkPowell knew the truth but chose to serve hi... by E. T. SIMON on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:26:38 AM
he should have known. And still I ask a more ... by Daniel Geery on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:36:36 PM
Who cares.  War crimes are war crimes are war... by Mrt Baggins on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:20:54 PM
thinkprogress.org   Specific evidence of war ... by Lance Ciepiela on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:28:15 PM
Powell defined his integrity when he stood with Bu... by Michael Collins on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:34:17 PM
Hey Michael ,  I don't think these people are... by Bill Mack on Monday, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:18:06 PM
It never ceases to amaze me, the hypocrisy pratice... by Eddy Schmid on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:05:06 AM
I could hit the "recommend" button over and over a... by Lester Shepherd on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:34:08 AM
Wilkerson has repeatedly said "I will testify" but... by Gustav Wynn on Wednesday, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:08:05 PM