Powell Endorses Obama

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
The political dynamics are quite interesting right now. Hard to imagine that an ex Republican Secretary of State of one term ago would be endorsing a Democrat who blasted his decision to enter Iraq. Yet, Obama isn't that far ahead of McCain in the race.
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
Powell is the only decent person out of that administration, I believe he is the sole person to be truly sickened by his actions especially that debacle at the UN which is why he could no longer work for the evil Bush and is gang of neo-con liars.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
The political dynamics are quite interesting right now. Hard to imagine that an ex Republican Secretary of State of one term ago would be endorsing a Democrat who blasted his decision to enter Iraq. Yet, Obama isn't that far ahead of McCain in the race.

He's still a republican, but he is supporting Obama, as a republican
The race will probably get closer as election day approaches, it often happens, not
sure now though, after Powell's endorsement.
 
Last edited:

normbc9

Electoral Member
Nov 23, 2006
483
14
18
California
General Powell is a man who is respected by many in the US. His full statement that led up to his revelation that he is voting for Barak Obama really says it all. This statement speaks volumes to Americans and hopefully others too. In my opinion he was literally thrown under the train by the Bush/Cheney White House gang and everyone acted like he was supposed to just do nothing. He is a man of principle and he stepped down once he was able to see the carefully crafted deception that was hatched by the Bush cronies and the minute he saw it he departed. To me he is a man above reproach and this will no doubt improve Obama's election chances. I'm now seeing the same pattern I saw many years ago when many Democrats voted for Ronald Reagn (Reagan Democrats) and this time it will be Obama Republicans who are sick of this ultra right, do as we tell you Republican leadership. Hopefully those in power in the US today will all be held accountable for their misdeeds while serving in public office. The McCain campaign is now in a shambles and that too was created by a bunch of inept handlers.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
General Powell is a man who is respected by many in the US. His full statement that led up to his revelation that he is voting for Barak Obama really says it all. This statement speaks volumes to Americans and hopefully others too. In my opinion he was literally thrown under the train by the Bush/Cheney White House gang and everyone acted like he was supposed to just do nothing. He is a man of principle and he stepped down once he was able to see the carefully crafted deception that was hatched by the Bush cronies and the minute he saw it he departed. To me he is a man above reproach and this will no doubt improve Obama's election chances. I'm now seeing the same pattern I saw many years ago when many Democrats voted for Ronald Reagn (Reagan Democrats) and this time it will be Obama Republicans who are sick of this ultra right, do as we tell you Republican leadership. Hopefully those in power in the US today will all be held accountable for their misdeeds while serving in public office. The McCain campaign is now in a shambles and that too was created by a bunch of inept handlers.

Yes, I feel the same
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
This is the closest a black man has ever come to the presidential office is Rev. Jesse Jackson who almost became vice-president but Dukakus decided to go with an old white guy

Collin Powell a decorated war hero and an excellent politician, he is retired and wants to live in peace and the last thing he will do is vote against a black man if he wants to keep his sanity.

I did watch his interview on Meet The Press and he did have some valid points.

He is a Republican and for him to publicly endorse Obama a Democrat just proves that he is voting his race.

The big question is who will do the best job for Americans in these hard economic times?

On 60 Minutes On CBS the chairman on Bank Of America was asked with the new deal with the federal government means that America became socialist, he agreed but he seemed to think that he will be able to pay back the money in five years.

Once the government goes socialist or communist like USA is about to do, you just don’t come out of it in five years.

With Obama’s spending spree with taxpayer’s money of much needed social programs capitalism is dead for a while.

In public healthcare private companies won’t be able to gouge the American people because they have to deal with the government that knows their bottom line.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
This is the closest a black man has ever come to the presidential office is Rev. Jesse Jackson who almost became vice-president but Dukakus decided to go with an old white guy

Collin Powell a decorated war hero and an excellent politician, he is retired and wants to live in peace and the last thing he will do is vote against a black man if he wants to keep his sanity.

I did watch his interview on Meet The Press and he did have some valid points.

He is a Republican and for him to publicly endorse Obama a Democrat just proves that he is voting his race.

The big question is who will do the best job for Americans in these hard economic times?

On 60 Minutes On CBS the chairman on Bank Of America was asked with the new deal with the federal government means that America became socialist, he agreed but he seemed to think that he will be able to pay back the money in five years.

Once the government goes socialist or communist like USA is about to do, you just don’t come out of it in five years.

With Obama’s spending spree with taxpayer’s money of much needed social programs capitalism is dead for a while.

In public healthcare private companies won’t be able to gouge the American people because they have to deal with the government that knows their bottom line.

And, that is fair.

It was figured a few days ago that, McCains spending, as president, would be higher than
what Obama will spend.
Colin Powell has more class than 'just' to go with the black guy. If Obama was the black republican guy, he would not have come forward to endorce him. He would have stayed
out of sight, as he has done for the last few years.
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
And, that is fair.

It was figured a few days ago that, McCains spending, as president, would be higher than
what Obama will spend.
Colin Powell has more class than 'just' to go with the black guy. If Obama was the black republican guy, he would not have come forward to endorce him. He would have stayed
out of sight, as he has done for the last few years.

Just about the way I saw it.
....but don't tell Pat Buchanan.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Colin Powell is a war criminal and soon he will face justice or no one will.
International War Crimes Tribunal
United States War Crimes Against Iraq​
Initial Complaint Charging


George Bush, J. Danforth Quayle, James Baker,
Richard Cheney, William Webster, Colin Powell,
Norman Schwarzkopf and Others to be named With
Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against
Humanity and Other Criminal Acts and High Crimes in
Violation of the Charter of the United Nations,
International Law, the Constitution of the United States
and Laws made in Pursuance Thereof.


Preliminary Statement

These charges have been prepared prior to the first hearing of the Commission of Inquiry by its staff. They are based on direct and circumstantial evidence from public and private documents; official statements and admissions by the persons charged and others; eyewitness accounts; Commission investigations and witness interviews in Iraq, the Middle East and elsewhere during and after the bombing; photographs and video tape; expert analyses; commentary and interviews; media coverage, published reports and accounts gathered between December 1990 and May l991. Commission of Inquiry hearings will be held in key cities where evidence is available supporting, expanding, adding, contradicting, disproving or explaining these, or similar charges against the accused and others of whatever nationality. When evidence sufficient to sustain convictions of the accused or others is obtained and after demanding the production of documents from the U.S. government, and others, and requesting testimony from the accused, offering them a full opportunity to present any defense personally, or by counsel, the evidence will be presented to an International War Crimes Tribunal. The Tribunal will consider the evidence gathered, seek and examine whatever additional evidence it chooses and render its judgment on the charges, the evidence, and the law. Background

Since World War I, the United Kingdom, France, and the United States have dominated the Arabian Peninsula and Gulf region and its oil resources. This has been accomplished by military conquest and coercion, economic control and exploitation, and through surrogate governments and their military forces. Thus, from 1953 to 1979 in the post World War II era, control over the region was exercised primarily through U.S. influence and control over the Gulf sheikdoms of Saudi Arabia and through the Shah of Iran. From 1953 to 1979 the Shah of Iran acted as a Pentagon/CIA surrogate to police the region. After the fall of the Shah and the seizure of U.S. Embassy hostages in Teheran, the U.S. provided military aid and assistance to Iraq, as did the USSR, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and most of the Emirates, in its war with Iran. U.S. policy during that tragic eight year war, 1980 - 1988, is probably best summed up by the phrase, "we hope they kill each other." Throughout the seventy-five year period from Britain's invasion of Iraq early in World War I to the destruction of Iraq in 1991 by U.S. air power, the United States and the United Kingdom demonstrated no concern for democratic values, human rights, social justice, or political and cultural integrity in the region, nor for stopping military aggression there. The U.S. supported the Shah of Iran for 25 years, selling him more than $20 billion of advanced military equipment between 1972 and 1978 alone. Throughout this period the Shah and his brutal secret police called SAVAK had one of the worst human rights records in the world. Then in the 1980s, the U.S. supported Iraq in its wrongful aggression against Iran, ignoring Iraq's own poor human rights record.[l]
When the Iraqi government nationalized the Iraqi Petroleum Company in 1972, the Nixon Administration embarked on a campaign to destabilize the Iraqi government. It was in the 1970s that the U.S. first armed and then abandoned the Kurdish people, costing tens of thousands of Kurdish lives. The U.S. manipulated the Kurds through CIA and other agencies to attack Iraq, intending to harass Iraq while maintaining Iranian supremacy at the cost of Kurdish lives without intending any benefit to the Kurdish people or an autonomous Kurdistan.[2]
The U.S. with close oil and other economic ties to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait has fully supported both governments despite the total absence of democratic institutions, their pervasive human rights violations and the infliction of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments such as stoning to death for adultery and amputation of a hand for property offe
http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrim2.htm


Global Research Editor's Note

In a bitter irony, Colin Powell, who was responsible for the coverup of the My Lai massacre acceded to a "brilliant" career in the Armed Forces. In 2001 he was appointed Secretary of State in the Bush administration. Although never indicted, Powell was also deeply implicated in the Iran-Contra affair.

It is worth noting that Colin Powell was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time of the Gulf War, which resulted in the deaths of thousands of retreating Iraqi soldiers in what British war correspondent Felicity Arbuthnot entitled "Operation Desert Slaughter".

"The forty two day carpet bombing, enjoined by thirty two other countries, against a country of just twenty five million souls, with a youthful, conscript army, with broadly half the population under sixteen, and no air force, was just the beginning of a United Nations led, global siege of near mediaeval ferocity."

In the words of General Norman Schwartzkopf who led Operation Desert Slaughter "'There was no one left to kill'...
There have been many US sponsored My Lais since the Vietnam war.

Michel Chossudovsky. Global Research, March 15, 2008



US Army Major Colin Powell

Forty years ago this week, on March 16, 1968, a company of US Army combat soldiers from the Americal Division swept into the South Vietnamese hamlet of My Lai, rounded up the 500+ unarmed, non-combatant residents, all women, children, babies and a few old men, and executed them in cold blood, Nazi-style. No weapons were found in the village, and the whole operation took only 4 hours.



\

Although there was a serious attempt to cover-up this operation (which involved a young up-and-coming US Army Major named Colin Powell), those who orchestrated or participated in this “business-as-usual” war zone atrocity did not deny the details of the slaughter when the case came to trial several years later. But the story had filtered back to the Western news media, thanks to a couple of courageous eye-witnesses whose consciences were still intact. An Army court-marital trial eventually convened against a handful of the soldiers, including Lt. William Calley and Company C commanding officer, Ernest Medina.


Lt. William Calley

According to many of the soldiers in Company C, Medina ordered the killing of “every living thing in My Lai,” including, obviously, innocent noncombatants - men, women, children and even farm animals. Lt. Calley was charged with the murder of 109 civilians. In his defense statement he stated that he had been taught to hate all Vietnamese, even children, who, he had been told, “were very good at planting mines.”
That a massacre had occurred was confirmed by many of Medina’s soldiers and recorded by photographers, but the Army still tried to cover it up. The cases were tried in military courts with juries of Army officers, who eventually either dropped the charges against all of the defendants (except Calley) or acquitted them. Medina and all the others who were among the killing soldiers that day went free, and only Calley was convicted of the murders of “at least 20 civilians.” He was sentenced to life imprisonment for his war crime, but, under pressure from patriotic pro-war Americans, President Nixon pardoned him within weeks of the verdict.
The trial stimulated a lot of interest because it occurred during the rising outcry of millions of Americans against the infamous undeclared war that was acknowledged by many observers as an “overwhelming atrocity.” Ethical Americans were sick of the killing. However, 79% of those that were polled strenuously objected to Calley’s conviction, some veteran’s groups even voicing the opinion that instead of condemnation, he and his comrades should have received medals of honor for killing “Commie Gooks.”
Just like the extermination camp atrocities of World War II, the realities of My Lai deserve to be revisited so that it will happen “never again.” The Vietnam War was an excruciating time for conscientious Americans because of the numerous moral issues surrounding the mass slaughter in a war that uselessly killed 58,000 American soldiers, caused the spiritual deaths of millions more, killed 3 million Vietnamese (mostly civilians) and psychologically traumatized countless others on both sides of the conflict.
Of course the Vietnam War was a thousand times worse for the innocent people of that doomed land than it was for the soldiers. The Vietnamese people were victims of an army of brutal young men from a foreign land who were taught that the “little yellow people” were pitiful sub-humans and deserved to be killed - with some GIs preferring to inflict torture first. “Kill-or-be-killed” is a reality that is standard operating procedure for military combat units of every nation of every era and of every ideology.
Vietnam veterans tell me that there were scores, maybe hundreds, of “My Lai-type massacres “ during that war. Not surprisingly, the Pentagon refuses to acknowledge that truth. Execution-style killings of “potential” Viet Cong sympathizers (i.e., anybody that wasn’t a US military supporter) were common. Many combat units “took no prisoners” (a euphemism for murdering captives, rather than having to follow the nuisance Geneva Conventions which requires humane treatment for prisoners of war). The only unusual thing about the My Lai Massacre was that it was eventually found out. The attempted Pentagon cover-up failed but justice was still not done.
Very few soldiers or their commanding officers have ever been punished for the many war crimes that occurred during that war because those in charge knew that killing (and torturing) of innocent civilians during war-time is simply the norm – excused as “collateral damage.” After all, as US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld later infamously proclaimed, “stuff happens.”
The torture was enjoyable for some - for awhile (witness Auschwitz yesterday and Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay today). And wars are profitable for many - and still are (witness the Krupp family of Nazi-era infamy and Halliburton, the Blackwater mercenaries, et al. today).
The whole issue of the justification of war, with its inherent atrocities, never seems to be thoroughly examined in an atmosphere of openness and historical honesty. Full understanding of the realities of war and its spiritual, psychological and economic consequences for the victims is rarely attempted. If we who are non-soldiers ever truly experienced the horrors of combat, the effort to abolish war would suddenly be a top priority (perhaps even for the current crop of “Chicken Hawk” warmongers in the Bush Administration).
If we actually knew the gruesome realities of war (or even understood the immorality of spending trillions of dollars on war preparation while hundreds of millions of people are homeless and starving) we would refuse to cooperate with the things that make for war. But that wouldn’t be good for the war profiteers. So those “merchants of death” must hide the gruesome truths and try instead to make war seem patriotic and honorable, with flag-waving sloganeering like “Be All That You Can Be.” Or they might try to convince the soon-to-be-childless mothers of doomed, dead or dying soldiers that their child had died fighting for God, Country and Honor instead of domination of the Middle East’s oil reserves.
Let’s face it. The US military standing army system has been bankrupting America at $500+ billion year after year after year – even in times of so-called “peace.” The warmongering legacy of the Pentagon is still with us, particularly among those “patriots” including GOP presidential candidate John McCain, who wanted to “nuke the gooks” in Vietnam. A multitude of un-elected policy-makers of that ilk are still in charge of US foreign policy today, and they have been solidifying their power to continue America’s misbegotten, unaffordable and unsustainable militarism with the huge profits made off the deaths, screams, blood, guts and permanent disabilities of those hood-winked soldiers who were told that they were ”saving the world for democracy” when in fact they were making the world safe for exploitive capitalism and obscene profits for the few. And the politicians entrenched in both major political parties, who are all-too-often paid lapdogs for the war profiteers, don’t want the gravy train to be derailed.
Things haven’t changed much even from the World War II mentality that conveniently overlooked the monstrous evil that was perpetrated on tens of thousands of unarmed, innocent civilians at Nagasaki on August 9, 1945, a war crime so heinous that the psychological consequences, immune deficiency disorders and cancers from that nuclear holocaust are still being experienced in unimaginable suffering 6 decades later.
Things haven’t really changed when one witnesses the political mentality that allows the 500,000 deaths of innocent Iraqi civilians in the aftermath of the first Gulf War or the 1,000,000 civilian deaths in the current fiasco in Iraq.
So it appears that our military and political leaders haven’t learned anything since My Lai. The people sitting next to you at work are, like most unaware Americans, almost totally ignorant of the hellish realities of the war-zone, so they may continue to be blindly patriotic and indifferent to the plight of the “others” who suffer so much in war. They may think that some people are less than human, and, therefore, if necessary, can be justifiably killed “for Volk, Fuhrer und Vaterland.”
As long as most American citizens continue to glorify war and militarism and ignore or denigrate the peacemakers; as long as the American public endorses the current spirit of nationalism and ruthless global capitalism; and as long as the America’s political leadership remains prudently silent (and therefore consenting to the homicidal violence of war) we will not be able to effect a change away from the influence of conscienceless war-mongers and war profiteers. The prophets and peacemakers are never valued in militarized nations, especially in times of war; indeed, they are always marginalized, demeaned and even imprisoned as traitors. And one of the reasons is that there are no profits to be made in peacemaking, whereas there are trillions to be made in the biggest business going: the preparation for war, the execution of war and the highly profitable “re-building” efforts (“blow it up/build it up” economics), all the while ignoring the “inconvenient” but inevitable collateral damage to the creation and its creatures.
As long as we continue to be led by unapologetic and merciless war-makers and their wealthy business cronies and as
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8339

He's a rotten piece of work, a worthless pig of a human.
 

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
well it certainly doesn't surprise me, one black endorcing another. And bush did screw powell as well.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
well it certainly doesn't surprise me, one black endorcing another. And bush did screw powell as well.
\\

What has the color of their skin have to do with it, why would you even mention
that it is one black endorcing another, do you also say 'one white endorcing another'?
 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
54
Oshawa
Yes, especially since it is a racist move on the part of Powell.

Please explain how Powell picking Obama is racist.

Then, at the same time tell me how Liberman picking McCain is also racist.

This should be good.
 
Last edited: