Farewell, Mr. Powell
Now that it is clear there were no WMD's in Iraq and that there is no evidence WMD's were moved to Syria or elsewhere before the war, and now that we are in the final days of Colin Powell's tenure at State, it might be worthwhile to recall the media's reporting of his infamous presentation at the UN Security Council.
On June 29, 2003, the Washington Post published an op-ed by Gilbert Cranberg, former editorial page editor of the Des Moines Register, that analyzed the editorials of 40 newspapers across the country regarding Powell's speech. Every single one agreed: Powell proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Iraq had WMD's:
- "a massive array of evidence"
- "a detailed and persuasive case"
- "a powerful case"
- "a sober, factual case"
- "an overwhelming case"
- "a compelling case"
- "the strong, credible and persuasive case"
- "a persuasive, detailed accumulation of information"
- "the core of his argument was unassailable"
- "a smoking fusillade . . . a persuasive case for anyone who is still persuadable"
- "an accumulation of painstakingly gathered and analyzed evidence"
- "only the most gullible and wishful thinking souls can now deny that Iraq is harboring and hiding weapons of mass destruction"
- "the skeptics asked for proof; they now have it"
- "a much more detailed and convincing argument than any that has previously been told"
- "Powell's evidence . . . was overwhelming"
- "an ironclad case . . . incontrovertible evidence"
- "succinct and damning evidence . . . the case is closed"
- "Colin Powell delivered the goods on Saddam Hussein"
- "masterful"
- "If there was any doubt that Hussein . . . needs to be . . . stripped of his chemical and biological capabilities, Powell put it to rest."
If you watched the cable news networks, you may recall that their reaction was enthusiastically positive as well.
Of course, if any of these editorial writers had actually examined Powell's case, he might have noticed some problems, such as his unwillingness to name verifiable sources. Or his willingness to embellish the transcripts from intercepted conversations between Iraqi military officers:
In Powell's version, the order from headquarters to "inspect" for ammunition became an order to "clean out all of the areas, the scrap areas, the abandoned areas." Powell also claimed that headquarters told the field officer, "Make sure there is nothing there." This instruction appears nowhere in the transcript.
It's not too late for some editorial writer out there to rewrite the piece on Powell's case before the UN -- the highlight of his tenure at the State Department -- as part of a retrospective on his career. How about ...
- "a massive array of rhetoric and drama, with little substance"
- "a powerful case for believing that Powell has sold out to the neocons"
- "a less-than-sober, fact-esque case"
- "an underwhelming case"
- "a smoking pile of dogshit . . . a persuasive case only for those who don't need persuasion"
- "an accumulation of painstakingly gathered and audience-tested spins"
- "only the most gullible and wishful thinking souls can think they now know that Iraq is harboring and hiding weapons of mass destruction"
- "the skeptics asked for proof; they got a song and dance instead"
- "much more detailed and articulate bullshit than any that has previously been provided by the President or his cabinet members"
- "Powell's 'evidence' . . . ROFLMAO"
- "If there was a crack of doubt that Hussein . . . needs to be . . . stripped of his chemical and biological capabilities, Powell wedged his speech into it and made it into a canyon."
Farewell, Mr. Powell. You were our only hope for honesty and fairness, and you misled us.
2:01:27 AM 
|
|
