Secretary of State, Colin Powell said there is no "direct" connection between Saddam and 9/11 and also thinks Kerry would respond to a terrorist attack in a "robust" way.
I find this interesting that for an adminstration that is always famously "on message" this shows that there is some defections. Powell's message differs from Vice President Cheney's which does see a connection and basically said a vote for Kerry is a vote for death.
Powell has been known to disagree with the adminstration, but that has usually been in private. What is the reason that he is saying something like this which is "off message?"
Fascinating.
Posted by Dennis at September 13, 2004 08:18 AM(1) Powell said a long time ago he would not serve in a second Bush adminsitration term.
(2) Powell is really ticked at the intel people who sandbagged him on the Iraq intel. Remember, a lot of these guys worked for HIM when he was CHief of Staff. Most of you probably don't know how the military works - but at the staff level, a Commander developes a strong valuation of each of his staff, knowing exactly what their strenths and weaknesses are. when a crisis comes he relies on that valuation to enable him to shortcut his evaluations of their information. If a staffer has always been precise, thorough and accurate, the boss will just assume - in a crisis - that is the case and not check as much as usual, because the time simply is not there. I think some intel staff pukes used this past trust to sandbag GEN Powell.
Second, Powell is ticked at himself. He KNEW that Clinton debased the intel process, mostly in the China sections, but the effect was general. Powell knew that - but he did not double check to see if it was going on with Iraq. That at least is my guess, based on my own experience.
That being the case, Powell is sticking to very precise terminology. Fact is, Saddam has his fingerprints all over international terrorism, and in a huge way - just not mostly with Al Q. His guys were the two big terr groups attacking Israel.
Powell's comment isn't different than the rest of the administration, there is a difference between a 9/11 connection and a Al Qaida connection.
Kerry may very well be robust in prosecuting the Kerry Doctrine, but that doctrine is set on a pre-9/11 mindset. To prosecute terrorist as criminals and respond to any terrorist attack with that robust vigor. A response after an attack which such a policy does invite aggression from individuals willing to blow themselves up and not concerned what we do after the fact.
Rumor has it, that Colin Powell will resign after the election and they'll replace him with a more agreeable NeoCon (if Bush gets into office for a 2nd term). Richard Perle might be a good pick :)
I doubt that Colin Powell is a wholehearted supporter of the Bush/Cheney '04 ticket. He's hasn't made many (or any?) public political endorsements of Bush. His last gift to the Republican Party and the White House will be to stand by Bush/Cheney in November, after that I believe they go their seperate ways.
Hopefully he is trying to distance himself from the administration for later on.
Posted by: Nicole at September 13, 2004 05:45 PM