It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Powell Claims He Was Fired By President Bush

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Colin Powell was actually fired by Bush and did not resign. President Bush had his Chief of Staff call Powell shortly after he was re-elected and was told that the President wanted to make a "change". The change was that the President wanted Powell's resignation letter dated two days ago. He was fired.

 



www.washingtonpost.com
ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2004, eight days after the president he served was elected to a second term, Secretary of State Colin Powell received a telephone call from the White House at his State Department office. The caller was not President Bush but Chief of Staff Andrew Card, and he got right to the point.

"The president would like to make a change," Card said, using a time-honored formulation that avoided the words "resign" or "fire." He noted briskly that there had been some discussion of having Powell remain until after Iraqi elections scheduled for the end of January, but that the president had decided to take care of all Cabinet changes sooner rather than later. Bush wanted Powell's resignation letter dated two days hence, on Friday, November 12, Card said, although the White House expected him to stay at the State Department until his successor was confirmed by the Senate.

After four long years, Powell had anticipated the end of his service and sometimes even longed for it. He had never directly told the president but thought he had made clear to him during the summer of 2004 that he did not intend to stay into a second term.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I've got to say that I really did think that Powell had resigned. I just figured he had had enough of the headaches and just wanted out. Especially after finding out their intelligence for invading Iraq was flawed.

All of Powell's aides thought it was a sure thing that the President would want Powell to stay.

Most Americans liked Powell, it's hard to believe he was asked to resign. But Powell was telling the President his views on the Iraqi war that wasn't what he wanted to hear, so he "got the boot."




posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Its the best thing that happened to him. Getting away from the liars was a step up for this man.

Why would such a nice man (politician, but nice) want to associate himself with such goons?
Bush did him a favor.



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 09:32 PM
link   
I hate to say this, but I think this is just part of the game.


I know some of you despise this name, but David Icke did a well documented expose' last year on Colin Powell in his newsletter, and this guys background, all the way back to Vietnam. It wasn't pretty, but it was well documented, including that he had a hand in the coverup of Mai Lai. I take David with a grain of salt, of course, but this was pretty well backed up. I can't post the newsletter here, as it was by subscription, but I encourage people to research this man a little more first.

I don't know what to make of it, it's all getting worse and worse, and I can't help but look at the timing of this coming out.


[edit on 10/2/06 by niteboy82]



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Imho Powel was the only person at the top keeping this administration somewhat sane, he kept trying to advocate a more sane aproach at everything and just from the look on his face you could see he was disgusted finding out that the intel he used to advocate the Iraqi invasion was false, he was cheated and tricked as much as all of us were.

Once he left, things went from bad to worse and now, 2 years later, we have a US president that can pritty much put anyone, anywhere in jail, LEGALY, without trial or fair judgement. Be it a terrorist or a Blogger, the law changes made give him the power to put anyone in jail for something as simple as stating you disagree with his policy.

If we aren't carefull, we'll even have a president that can stay on for life, the lawmakers are bombarded with attempts to scrap the 22nd amendment and one of these days, they will succeed.



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 09:46 PM
link   
From the source.



But the administration, he pointed out, had entertained such hopes before over the past two years -- when it had set up a new legal framework for Iraq, when it had first turned a modicum of government power over to handpicked Iraqis and when ousted dictator Saddam Hussein had been captured -- and those hopes had been dashed every time. There would be a window of about two months after the election "to start to see progress," he told Bush. "If by the first of April this insurgency is not starting to ameliorate in some way, then I think you really have a problem."

Elections, and talking about democracy, were unlikely to stop the insurgency, he said. Only the fledgling Iraqi army could do that, and it was unclear whether it would ever succeed. Its competence was not just a matter of training, Powell said; it was a question of whether the troops believed in what they were fighting for.


This is what stands out the most Powell was far to connected to reality to remain apart of the Bush admin.

Cheers xpert11.

[edit on 2-10-2006 by xpert11]



posted on Oct, 2 2006 @ 09:46 PM
link   
I still don't like him. He agreed to sign up with the pack of loons and probably would have stayed indefinitely. I do agree, however that this was the best thing that happened to him. If he wants to impress me (and I know he doesn't) or make amends for the attrocities he sold us in the run up to the war, he needs to comeclean on national TV and lay it all out. What was known when, who said what, etc. A confessional if you will.

Tell the truth!

But alas he will be the "good soldier" until the bitter end.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
I hate to say this, but I think this is just part of the game.


I know some of you despise this name, but David Icke did a well documented expose' last year on Colin Powell in his newsletter, and this guys background, all the way back to Vietnam. It wasn't pretty, but it was well documented, including that he had a hand in the coverup of Mai Lai.


Niteboy, David Icke isn't the only one. Howard Zinn, a well-respected historian and author, also talks about Powell's not-so-nice background, including the My Lai massacre coverup in Vietnam. THis man is not the hero/saint he's made out to be. He's a yes man. The fact that he was fired rather than quitting tells us he really doesn't have a very strong backbone, he was still willing to support Bush's inhumane programs and actions.
And having said that, he was probably the only sane voice of reason in the Bush group.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Doesn't the Shrub have a habit of getting rid of people that don't tell him what he wants to hear?
I was just talking about Powell last night, and my friend and I came to the conclusion that had Powell run for president at the end of DS1, he would have won in a hands down landslide. At the time, he was DA MAN!! And had marketable appeal for both blacks and whites, as well as Democrats and Republicans.
I think that of all the Shrubs people, despite the shady background, Powell is the only one that had a modicum of intregrity. By the time he was asked to resign, he was through and disillusioned with the current administration anyway.
JMO



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Powell's mistake was to disagree with Rumsfeld about the way Iraq was handle.

Bush choose Rumsfeld over Powell's, occurs many people that are in the military knows the reason why Powell was gone.

Anybody that has talk, disagree or made any ill comments about Bush policies in Iraq has met the same end.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by deluded
I still don't like him. He agreed to sign up with the pack of loons and probably would have stayed indefinitely. I do agree, however that this was the best thing that happened to him. If he wants to impress me (and I know he doesn't) or make amends for the attrocities he sold us in the run up to the war, he needs to comeclean on national TV and lay it all out. What was known when, who said what, etc. A confessional if you will.

Tell the truth!

But alas he will be the "good soldier" until the bitter end.


agreed. Unfortunately for Powell, the main thing people are going to remember him by is the UN report on the WMD in Iraq. and it's really a shame because, IMO, he was one of the more intelligent voices of this fiasco of an administration.


The administration's performance during its first four years would have been even worse without Powell's damage control. At least once a week, it seemed, Powell trooped over to the Oval Office and cleaned all the dog poop off the carpet. He held a youthful, inexperienced president's hand. He told him everything would be all right because he, the secretary of State, would fix it. And he did everything from a serious crisis with China when a U.S. reconnaissance aircraft was struck by a Chinese F-8 fighter jet in April 2001, to the secretary's constant reassurances to European leaders following the bitter breach in relations over the Iraq war. It wasn't enough, of course, but it helped.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

www.thewashingtonnote.com...

(my emphasis added)
i think that in this case, the dog poop comment fits perfectly.

edit: fixed link

[edit on 3-10-2006 by karby]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
So do not blame Powell for his speech at the UN he did what he was told by Bush.

For coming forward and expressing his disappointments about the Iraqi invasion and strategy set by Rumsfeld he got fired.

Powell knew that Iraq was not going turn into a good thing.

[edit on 3-10-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
So not blame Powell for his speech at the UN he did what he was told by Bush.



huh? i don't understand this statement.
but if you're saying what i think you're saying...
then, no. i DO blame Powell for is speech at the UN. he knew it was bull doodoo, and yet he decided to just shut up and go along with it. he should've yanked the reigns then and there. this speech of his will be the extremely noticeable ink dot on an otherwise clean shirt, in that nobody's going to pay attention to the rest of the shirt, i.e. the majorty of his career.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Marg, I agree with what you say most of the time... but Powell, while he may have been told what to say at the UN, still went ahead and did it. He's way too high in the food chain to escape responsibility for his actions.

Unfortunately, it seems as if in this administration, the route to promotion is by uncritical support for the dubious neocon view of the world. And as we see, the situation is playing itself out again vis-a-vis Iran.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
So not blame Powell for his speech at the UN he did what he was told by Bush.


He did make that speech because Bush wanted him to, but the facts he was giving he also believed in, it wasn't until later that it was found out the info from intelligence wasn't cold hard facts.

If you read the whole article, he explains all of this, and how when he found out that some of the info was incorrect, he said some things to reporters that got him in trouble with Bush and Condi.

Read the whole article, it's long, but it is a pretty good read.


[edit on 3/10/06 by Keyhole]



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole

He did make that speech because Bush wanted him to,


Exactly,



but the facts he was giving he also believed in, it wasn't until later that it was found out the info from intelligence wasn't cold hard facts.


Right on the target, he was not given all the facts, Bush kept many things from Powell and the facts about Iraq was one of them.

It wasn't until after the Iraqi war started that he saw the mistakes made and when he tried to bring them out, he was fired.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   
I seem to recall that even before the 2004 election that Powell was expressing his desire to leave the administration. It is certainly the prerogative of the president to retain or replace any member of the cabinet and if Powell was openly unhappy in his role, then the president would be justified in asking for a "change."



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   
so let me get this..

Donald rumsfeild offered his resignation, but it was refused.. and look at the lives he has cost this country... The president refuses to remove him..

Colin powell who argued AGAINST rummsfields policies, and who in the end ' was right ' was allowed to resign, and even had the hint of being pushed into resigning.

The bush admin has had MAJOR turn over in its priority positions..

Im pretty certain there's a lot more to we are being told about these officials resigning.


But the only thing with powell that bothers me, is that UN presentation.
Was he duped, and believed what he was saying was true?
meaning he obviosly couldnt sort the crap from the truth? so its probably good we dont have a man of that ability in a power position.

OR was he directed to give that intellegence... much like bushes speaches was his presentation prepared for him?

I dont liek to make my mind up on 50/50 decisions when there's no proof....

but when every single decision from this governemnt ends up being a 50/50 over right or wrong.. you tend to see a pattern emerge...

especially when we are TOLD what to believe..



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
But the only thing with powell that bothers me, is that UN presentation.
Was he duped, and believed what he was saying was true?
meaning he obviosly couldnt sort the crap from the truth? so its probably good we dont have a man of that ability in a power position.


My guess is that Powell believed what he was saying was true but he had to take the approach that you would take to selling a product on an info commerical. That is certain facts and the impact of Iraqs supposed WMDs was exagrated.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
so let me get this..

Donald rumsfeild offered his resignation, but it was refused.. and look at the lives he has cost this country... The president refuses to remove him....


Several times, when he has been embroiled in controversy, mostly of a partisan nature, Rumsfeld has tendered his resignation as a matter of courtesy to the president. However, the president is pleased with Rumsfeld's service and has rejected those resignations. Of course, if Mr. Rumsfeld were to insist, the president would have no choice, but to accept the resignation.

That is the most salient difference between what was going on between Powell and the administration and what is going on with Rumsfeld.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 08:25 PM
link   
This doesn't surprise me at all - Powell was way too sane to fit in with the Bush foreign policy team.

I'm surprised that Condi - who is apparently not a neocon herself - got the job.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join