Axis of Liars
Liberal Oasis has the goods on Colin Powell the newest member of the Axis of Liars!
First, it appeared that Colin Powell was the only sane member of the Administration, just chronically submissive.Then, as he gradually moved to the attack-Iraq camp, his stature and savvy painted him an enlightened realist -- doing his best to buttress the UN, maintain our alliances, while dealing with Saddam.
Today, following his comments about the bin Laden tape, it is clear what Powell really is.
A manipulative liar.
A fake.
A phony.
With blood on his hands.
Just like the lot of them.
He sealed his place in the annals of prevarication once he used the bin Laden tape to back up last week’s suspect assertions of a Saddam-Osama connection.
When the exact opposite was proven.
Comments
It amazes me how it's impossible for people to comprehend that just because you think Iraq needs to be dealt with you are not:
Talk about hasty generalizations.
They are not saying that because he thinks Iraq needs to be dealt with he is a liar, but becuase he lied. Are you claiming that he didn't lie. That the facts they present don't lead to that conclusion. That is the real question. To correct the record Vinny the article doesn't claim he is evil, an idiot, or uninformed. I suppose you could imply from the article that they think he is a warmonger though not even that is clear. A resonable inpretation would be that he is misguided in his support of war, and finally they didn't say that he was bloodthirsty, but that he had blood on his hands. So what we have here is not so much hasty generalizations on their part, but you using a straw man argument, attributing words to them that they did not use and then arguing against them.
It's more of a "heard this before, here it goes again" comment... One of which is repeatedly made (in fact, made against me on this very blog by one of your commenters, not once, but twice.)
You can pick any of those arguments I listed, and point any of them at every critique of the people who support the war. It's not just written about Bush. It's every conservative. Every person who wants to go ahead with the war. We've all been with one of those arguments, and judging from your excerpt, I have no reason to think otherwise.
Is everyone who changes their mind a liar? Isn't it indeed possible that he has new evidence that he can't share? Not according to this:
"LiberalOasis is as guilty as anyone for thinking that there was some intelligence and decency in Powell."
I was as guilty as anyone for expecting it from them.
Thanks Norm for sticking up.
Just to clarify, I largely focused on Powell's lie regarding the "link" between bin Laden and Hussein. One can make a strained argument I suppose, but Powell is a knowledgeable enough person to safely conclude that he is willingly lying and distorting the facts to serve the political purpose of scaring the public enough to back a war that many Americans are not gung-ho for.
Secondly, I have previously called attention to Ken Pollack, the former CIA analyst, as one who makes an intellectually honest case for war, even if it is one that I still disagree with.
Personally, I agreed with the analysis on Liberal Oasis -- I've been feeling the same way, myself, about him of late.
I understand that you have heard it before. Whether you are conservative or liberal there are those who will make unfair personal attacks and unsubstantiated arguments sometimes because they simply don't know any better and other times for more nefarious reasons, but the problem is we are talking about what Liberal Oasis said in the post I linked to. I'm not arguing with the fact that many have used the arguments you listed in the past but that Liberal Oasis didn't use them in their post. Of course not everyone who changes their mind is a liar. It would be silly to not change your mind if you found new evidence to support a different point of view. But once again that is not what Liberal Oasis is doing. They are not attacking him for changing his mind but for lying about the evidence he is using to support that change.
Before he made the statement, he was a man of integrity and honor when he disagreed with the war. I've heard that more times than I can count.
Liberal Oasis assumes that the only connection that exists is a tape that's tenuous at best. But does L.O. really think that all Powell knows is encompassed by that tape?
Since no one doubted his integrity before hand, why is it unrealistic to assume that it's still in tact, and there's more of a link than he is capable of identifying to the mass media? Maybe what he gave up is the most he can give up without giving too much away?
The truth is, he was only a man of integrity, in the eyes of liberals, because he was against the war. If liberals believed he was a man of integrity, they would trust his about-face as something more than being whipped into line.
Liberal Oasis doesn't assume that the tape is the only link that the adminstration has offered as evidence of a bin Laden, Saddam link. Only that lied about the tape claiming a link to al Qaeda that isn't evident from a fair reading of the tape. Here is a link to the transcript read it and tell me if you think Colin Powell was truthful about its contents. link to the transcript
No one questioned his integrity before because they didn't have a reason to question now they do.
Your statement that the only reason anyone would hold this view speaking only for myself is bullshit. I hold the view because I heard what he claimed the statement said then I read it and belive that even the most gracious description of what he did was played fast and loose with the facts. The facts are there Vinny examine them for yourself.
I've long been puzzled about Powell's continued presence in the Cabinet. There have been times that he's been completely marginalized, and now, he's king of the freakin' Hill.
A while back I heard rumblings that if, heaven forfend, the Shrub wins a second term, he wouldn't stay on as SoS; he has principles, but also understands loyalty against overwhelming odds.
Now? I'm doubtful of the whole magilla.