Colin Powell to the rescue! Maybe?

Colin Powell is being offered an opportunity to blow the eligibility-doubters out of the water. Will he seize the moment?

I never had much use for Powell. In 2002, when then-unknown Hussein was still swimming in the Chicago sewer system with his pals, I said this:

The fact that Powell was a career military man had me doubting my gut instincts about him until I remembered that the late Senator Joseph McCarthy's hearings were about Communists infiltrating the U.S. Army. It then occurred to me that General Powell may be Senator McCarthy's worst fears come to fruition.

Senator McCarthy offers yet another dependable insight into why Socialists insist they not be called Communists. Communists decided to call themselves Socialists when they realized that McCarthy never accused anyone of being a socialist. Separating the two words in the general public's understanding has always been of paramount importance to Communists so as to prevent Senator McCarthy's charges from being reexamined and then substantiated. In politically correct parlance this means that calling Colin Powell a socialist is a meaningless criticism, but pointing out that Powell may very well be a communist resonates on a more profound level.

Powell's stated positions on domestic issues; more government programs, more affirmative action, etc., combined with his obvious pleasure in renewed UNESCO funding certainly leads some observers to conclude that his absolute devotion to the U.N. defines him as a communist. Public figures have been designated as one thing or another on much less evidence than Powell has provided.

I based my comments Powell’s stand on domestic and International issues.

If you go back to his pre-secretary of state days, media mouths were forever saying, and printing, the myth that the public was calling for Powell to be president. The truth is: The big shots running the Washington Post and the New York Times were the only ones calling for Powell to be anything. Listening to what he had to say when the MSM touted him as a presidential contender, I repeatedly asked myself “Why is this man in the Republican party?” The Democrats should have been on their knees begging Powell to “come-on-down.”

There’s a lot more in Powell’s file that is suspect. Here are a few nuggets mined from his rich past:

The media always loved Powell. He was touted as the most popular person in Bush the Younger’s administration. True or untrue, Americans better start building the barricades whenever the media pushes anyone forward.

Next:

There was a time when every sentence Powell uttered contained the New World Order phrase “International community.” Nobody loves the UNIC more than Powell. It was Coalition Colin who was instrumental in giving the United Nations veto power over the US military in Desert Storm. It has been said that after the military wins a war the politicians lose the peace. General Powell turned that maxim on its head. He lost the peace before Desert Storm was fought.

Next:

Colin Powell outdid himself when he suggested the US might use American troops as monitors in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He never explained the difference between peacekeepers and monitors.

Next:

Republican Powell was accused of supporting Democrat Hussein because of race. That endorsement completed Powell’s transition to full-blown politician. Whether or not there is any truth in the accusation Powell can justify his:

“. . . statement a few weeks ago in which he was speaking to South Carolina State University's graduates and confirmed he enjoyed, ‘When President Obama took out his birth certificate and blew away Donald Trump and all the birthers!’.”

Powell taking the opportunity to present evidence demolishing the claim of forgery will go a long way toward silencing the eligibility-doubters —— if he truly believes the long form birth certificate is not a forgery.

Finally, Powell was angry because he felt betrayed after he addressed his beloved United Nations based on sixteen words in Bush’s State of the Union Address:

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Here’s Powell addressing the United Nations General Assembly:

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/wariniraq/colinpowellunsecuritycouncil.htm

It did not matter that at the time every intelligence agency believed the 16 words to be true. Later on the Left turned the 16 words into a cause célèbre. That made Powell angry in hindsight because he embarrassed himself in front of the International community.

At some point in time, Powell’s close associate Richard Armitage outed Valery Plame. The Plame Affair gave the Administration a severe case of the trots. I always felt that Powell thoroughly enjoyed the Bush White House’s discomfort —— kind of like watching a political Montezuma’s Revenge. The injustice in the whole thing was Scooter Libby ultimately taking the hit.

My point: Powell does not appear to mind defending a forged birth certificate as he did at SC State. He should have defended the famous 16 words with as much vigor. Now, Powell has the chance to redeem himself and prove the document in question is not forged or doctored in any way:

Colin Powell offered reward to hear eligibility evidence
$15,000 suggested for sit-down meeting on 'usurper in the White House'
Posted: August 08, 2011
10:52 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh

An organization preparing for a Gathering of Truth event regarding "the usurper in the White House" is offering former Secretary of State Colin Powell a hefty financial reward if he will listen to evidence that President Obama is ineligible.

Leaders of the Birther Summit organization are dispatching a letter today to Powell, who describes himself as Republican but has been a longtime ardent advocate for Obama.

The letter cites Powell's statement a few weeks ago in which he was speaking to South Carolina State University's graduates and confirmed he enjoyed, "When President Obama took out his birth certificate and blew away Donald Trump and all the birthers!"

According to the Blaze, the stadium "roared in approval" of Powell's comments.

Powell was referring to the image that was released April 27 – in hard copy format to a select few reporters and online for the rest of the world – that purports to be Obama's Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth.

The White House at the time said it was "proof positive" of Obama's Hawaiian birth and, thus, his constitutional eligibility as a "natural-born citizen." The statement disregarded entirely the argument that America's Founders understood a "natural-born citizen" to be the offspring of two of the nation's citizens. By that standard, Obama fails, as his father was not a U.S. citizen.

The image: (Go to link to see reproduction of forgery.)

Moreover, experts in a wide range of fields, from documents to imaging to computers to software, have declared that the online image and the printed copy is a manufactured composite.

Powell's statement apparently disregarded that evidence.

Dean C. Haskins, who is organizing the Birther Summit, said his request to Powell is simple.

"We would like to sit down with you and present evidence proving that what Barack Obama used to 'blow away Donald Trump and all the birthers' was not actually a valid birth certificate, but a forgery," the letter explains. "We would also like to present evidence to you of other dubious information Obama has used to misrepresent himself and his eligibility to hold the office of president, including his use of a Social Security number that appears to have never been assigned to him, and a forged Selective Service registration form."

Haskins said that if Powell chose to meet, he wouldn't have to prepare a speech, because his "experts will do most of the talking."

"We will, however, ask only one thing of you: after our evidence is presented, you will either affirm that the evidence we present is sufficient for Congress to launch an immediate, non-partisan investigation into this matter (to include independent testimony and discovery), or you will refute our evidence. It must be understood that refutation of our evidence must be done with evidence, and cannot be anecdotal or rhetorical in nature," Haskins wrote.

"Because we value your past and present service to our country, and because we still believe that duty, honor, and country still matter, we affirm that you should be well compensated for your time, and are prepared to offer to you, or to Wings of Hope (or any other charity you may specify), a check in the amount of $15,000. Because of the gravity of this issue, we think that $5,000 per hour for little more than listening to the truth should be fair compensation for your time," he continued.

"You stated that Barack Obama provided personal enjoyment for you by supplying what he called a 'birth certificate;' now, we'd like to supply you with something of actual value just to see the irrefutable evidence and listen to the truth," he wrote.

"I await your response to our challenge."

Haskins told WND that arrangements were made for the letter to be delivered to Powell through a speaker's bureau with which he's associated. If there is a meeting, he said, five reporters will be allowed to be present. Reporters can apply at 15000dollarchallenge.com.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=330417

 

Powell had to back the Bush administration lies..

 

To Margot: No he didn’t. He could have resigned if he was certain the 16 words did not state fact.

Irrespective of what he knew or believed at the time you’re not saying much for his character. Please, don’t ever defend me.

 

He was publically loyal to Bush as long as possible... and then he resigned.

Do you realize that Powell was marginalized by the dual citizens from the PNAC that surrounded Bush?

I think Powell tried to make a difference for quite a while.. and simply couldn't.

 

To Margot: I think you’re mixing oranges an apples. Powell wanted to advance the Democrat party’s agenda.

You should be asking yourself this: Would Powell have made the kind of difference he wanted to make with a Democrat in the White House? One thing is certain, he would not have been frustrated so often.

It’s important to note that:

There have also been occasions, on higher-profile topics, when Powell has broken through the barricades and advanced his positions. He (and Condi Rice) persuaded Bush, over Rumsfeld's opposition, to implement the U.S.-Russian accord reducing strategic missiles. However, he couldn't stop the president from pulling out of the Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty.

You can find the origins of Democrats ratifying the New START Treaty in Powell’s position on the U.S.-Russian accord reducing strategic missiles.

Powell’s successor Condoleezza Rice was no better. In fact, Bush’s secretaries of state were his biggest cabinet disasters. Rice Cakes was also a disaster when she was Bush’s National Security Advisor, but media loved her almost as much as they loved Powell. Remember, those two were appointed by a Republican president; so media adoration should have triggered every alarm in the conservative universe.

Finally, a secretary of state who was also a former general, George C. Marshall, would have resigned before he knowingly gave his name to a lie as you say Powell did. In Powell’s defense he claims he was misled.

Here’s the article that puts Powell in context back then:

The Tragedy of Colin Powell
How the Bush presidency destroyed him.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Thursday, Feb. 19, 2004, at 12:56 PM ET

http://www.slate.com/id/2095756/

 

Well I like Colin Powell. I think he was very loyal.. and I think you are a fool.

Powell did everthing he could do and failed to influence the Bush administration which was held captive by the PNAC signatories.

Bush was a drunken dope.. he had no clue what to do about the economy so he opted for war.

You do understand the Bush NEVER had a plan .. either foreign or domestic???

 

Why am I not surprised that you are attacking another military veteran?

Conservatives love to throw veterans under the bus.

John McCain
John Kerry
Mirka
and of course Colin Powell.

 

Granny says put Colin Powell in charge of Africa...

US Shells Out Aid for Africa as China, Russia Hold Back
August 09, 2011 | The United States is stepping up aid to the drought-stricken Horn of Africa in spite of deep deficit problems, while the countries that have snickered on the sidelines about America's cash crunch, specifically Russia and China, are giving pennies on the dollar to what the U.S. has committed.

See also:

Somalia famine could cause militant Al Shabab group to splinter
9 Aug.`11 - Group's more pragmatic leaders want to allow Western food aid into the areas they control

 

The fact is that Colin Powel has joined the coalition against establishing the truth about Obama's birth certificate and settle the ongoing question of Obama's place of birth. There has to be an arrival at truth no matter what kind of label or ridicule those who refuse to just go with the flow and ignore forensic experts analysis that the computer generated birth certificate is a forgery. A simple court hearing with confirmed legitimate original birth certificate would suffice.

Going beyond the birth certificate issue new issues such as Fast and Fureous, and the Self declaired war on Lybya which both are issues affecting the safety and secruity of America. Never before has a President initiated an international lawsuite against a State which also is aiding and abeting the enemy as in the internationsl lawsuite against Arizona.

 

To Margot: Good comeback, and so original. Blame Bush.

To SFJeff: Why is it that you libs hate the US military whenever they defend the country? Is it because the Left’s favorite target is the military-industrial complex? Today, liberals are screaming cut defense spending but don’t touch the parasite class. The only time liberals say anything good about the US military is when it is engaged in touchy-feely UN-approved interventions.

As to individuals: The way the Left treats veterans who are not famous borders on treason. I suspect that your phoney defense of a few well-known men who served in the military is because of their politics not their military service. Invoking the military service of John McCain and Colin Powell is a ploy to show how patriotic liberals are. The only thing they want to defend is the politics of two RINO. Let anyone criticize those politics and liberals jump at the opportunity to wrap themselves in the flag just like you’re doing right now.

You’re probably sincere about defending John Kerry. He is the poster child for disloyalty; he was a disgrace after he returned from Vietnam, and remains one to this day.

I don’t know who Mirka is, but if you like him it can’t be good for the military or this country.

 

Even Mc Cain is another UN New World order buff. He uses his Vietnam POW stint as if he was patriotic. He taught the Viet Kong English, and even when they wanted to turn him loose he stayed instead of getting out and leading a platoon back to rescue the rest of the prisoners in the Hanoi Hilton. He also crashed 5 Navy jets. He went to lybia and wants us to arm the Al quaeda rebels. He is a military wastefull spender which is costing our country and only getting involved in more foreign entanglements. He isn't much better than Obama but he is better.

 

Drought causing the famine...

Millions Impacted by Drought in Northern Kenya
August 11, 2011 - The ongoing drought in northern Kenya has put millions of people in need of immediate food assistance. Many children are at risk of facing the devastating effects of severe malnutrition. But the effects of acute water shortages on families are even more far reaching. They include lifestyle changes in communities experiencing water shortages.

 

Mothers go to blows to get food relief for their children...

Mothers exchange blows as Kenya drought deepens
13 Aug.`11 - 'She ordered me to move after she cut the line and I have been here since dawn. I could not let her'

See also:

U.N. fears rise in Somalia famine refugees
10 Aug.`11 — The number of people fleeing famine-hit areas of Somalia is likely to rise dramatically and could overwhelm international aid efforts in the Horn of Africa, a U.N. aid official said Tuesday.

 

I stand by what I stated.

Conservatives, such as yourself, detest veterans.

You are willing to throw any of them under the bus for your own agenda.

McCain
Powell
Kerry
Murtha- got that name wrong originally.

Any veterans which doesn't toe the line that you think must be towed will be happily thrown under the bus.

Conservatives have a long history of this, going back at least to Calvin Cooledge and his veto of the Veterans bonus, and of course Herbert Hoover ordering the Army to attack veterans during the Bonus March.

Conservatives are happy to talk about supporting veterans....just so long as they know their place.

 

To SFJEFF: Within the context of our discussion veterans cannot be separated from the military. To talk about one is to talk about the other.

Conservatives would only use the military in defense of the country. That’s the military’s place. Most veterans believe that is the way it should be.

On the other hand, liberals would use the military for every touchy-feely political goal that advances global government. Liberals will never be comfortable with the US military until it has been transformed into a universal police force under the UN’s command. That is how liberals see the military’s role after the NEW World Order is ushered in.

A universal police force will be called a Universal Peacekeeping Army or some such name up until the day all opposition to global government is silenced; then the lie will no longer be needed.

Finally, to better understand where liberals would take America’s military know this: That which a free people call a police force is called an army in a dictatorship. Once the threat of cross border wars has been laid to rest, every national army must transform itself into a police force committed solely to suppressing private sector liberties or cease to exist.

Having said the above, one question emerges: Will future Americans who serve in a universal police force still be called veterans?

 

Powell supports leftism in the form of Barack Obama. That means his past is irrelevant. He has chosen to become our enemy.

 

I guess that is why I am about to get RIFed for the second time. And strangely enough, both times was under Democrats. Not Republicans.

And only under Democrats have I seen Veterans programs cut. Just this month we saw what President Obama has done in order to save "$1 billion dollars", by butchering our education benefits. Now these were benefits promised to Veterans, and in many cases paid for by Veterans through payroll deductions.

Yet at the same time, we see the Pell Grant program budget over doubled (in case you missed it, the Budget Control Act which was passed a few weeks ago also increased Pell from $7.4 billion to $17 billion).

So they can't afford to fulfill the promises made to Veterans, but they can double the college money given to people that have not done anything yet to earn or deserve it.

And I know a lot of people that are furious about the changes. One guy already had to cancel his plans for college early next year. Because of the new changes, he just can't afford to attend anymore. And my plans are on hold as well for the same reason.

Promises made to veterans by Republicans, and broken by Democrats.

 

Well I am not about to dismiss such a claim. Not the whole picture that I remembered, so I went out looking to see what I could find. Trying to find a reasonably non-partisan site, I ended up with Military.com, and found this article:
http://www.military.com/news/article/obama-signs-veterans-caregivers-legislation.html

The legislation expands mental health counseling and services for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, including reserve-component servicemembers.
“We’re authorizing the [Veterans Affairs Department] to utilize hospitals and clinics outside the VA system to serve more wounded warriors … with traumatic brain injury,” the president said before signing the bill.
The new law also increases support for veterans in rural areas with the transportation and housing needed to reach VA hospitals and clinics. It also expands health care for women veterans to meet their unique needs, including maternity care for newborn children, and it allows VA to launch a pilot program to provide child care for veterans receiving intensive medical care.

Unfortunately Military.com doesn't have a comprehensive list of changes so next I went to the history of the GI Bill.

First signed into law under FDR, with a second version signed into law during the Korean War under Truman, and a third version under Johnson in the 60's. All under Democratic Presidents.

Then there is this:
n December 2010 Congress passed the Post-9/11 Veterans Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2010. The new law, often referred to as GI Bill 2.0,

I figure there must something to your statement, but I am having a hard time finding a reliable source of information on the level of benefits under say Bush and Obama.

Clearly from 1940 through the 1960's, the programs that most affected Veterans- and in my opinion for the original GI Bill- reshaped and took America from the Depression and WWII to the most succesful country in the world, were all enacted under Democratic adminstrations.

But give me some good solid sources to refer to and I would love to check it out. Promised veterans benefits should not be rescinded, and our VA health care system should be fully funded.

 

Well, I have been tracking the Post 9/11 bill since I came back into the military. Mostly, it is because it is the only one I qualify for. Because of when I first entered the service, I do not qualify for the Montgommery GI Bill. Instead, I fall under the now closed VEAP program.

As originally written, Post 9/11 was only open to those with Montgommery. I was one of those that wrote to congress in order to get that changed to anybody who had previously had a GI bill. However, changes to the bill are not that hard to find.

http://www.blogs.va.gov/VAntage/?p=4149

For example, the changes almost eliminate the availability of the "Yellow Ribbon Program". This is where some prestige colleges (Harvard, Yale, GW, etc) would offer a set number of slots where the college would pay any and all tuition above what the VA paid. With the new rules, current Yellow Ribbon students can continue, but it is unlikely that many more will be able to join.

There are a lot of other changes, but most of them only make it harder to attend college. I know for myself, this has pretty much made it impossible. The UC school system normally takes 3-5 week breaks between semesters. With the end of these payments for housing during breaks, there is no way I can get a job for just a month until school starts again.

And yea, this was done to save from $1-2 billion. I say they take that money out of the PEL Grant system, and give it back to where it was promised.

Oh, another change I forgot to mention was eligability and percentage covered. Under the old program, Post 9/11 covered everybody that served after 11 September 2001. Now, it only partially covers you. In order to get the full benefit, you must serve over 3 years since September 2001. If you serve less then that, they pay less, down to 40% if you serve 90 days or less during that time.

In other words, a grunt who was at 18 years during 9/11, does a deployment in the opening days and then retires no longer gets the full amount promised. He only gets from 60-70% covered.

They also cut the book allowance. Formerly it covered all textbooks, now it has a set cap at $1,000 a year. Good luck if you are an engineering major, with a minor in medicine. You can blow through that much in a semester with some degree programs.

Oh, and get this. Post 9/1 is also open to non-veterans. Yep, you got that right. You can get benefits, even if you never served in the military a day of your life.

Most people do not know, but there are actually 7 "Uniform Services" of the United States. The first 5 are obvious, Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard. But there are 2 more.

Ever wonder why the US Surgeon General wears a Navy Admiral's Uniform? Well, that is because he/she is a member of the United States Public Health Service. Members of the PHS are eligable to get Post 9/11 Gi benefits.

Oh, and the last is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That's right, the National Weathermen gets Post 9/11 benefits also.

Now all NOAA and PHS members got Post 9/11 benefits. However, one benefit they did not get was the ability to transfer it to their children. For a member of the military to do it they have to meet very narrow guidelines (one I was unable to do, because of my years of service). However, they can just transfer them. Unlike us in the Military, they are free to walk away at will. So the requirement to "serve for X long, then re-enlist for Y long" do not apply to them.

Personally, I think that the benefits for PHS and NOAA should be stripped away, unless they have served 1 year or more overseas in a war zone. I wonder how much money that would save?

But that will never happen. You see, the Military does not have a Union. But both PHS and NOAA have a very strong Federal Employees Union looking out for them. I say they strip the benefits, and let the Unions pay for those benefits. I mean, that is one of the reasons that Unions exist in the first place, right?

Oh, and I can't even go to school under the UC system anymore under the new rules for at least 3 years. This is because they have capped "out of state tuition". And since I have been outside of California for the last 8 years, I am no longer a legal resident of that state. In fact, an illegal alien gets to pay lower tuition in the UC system then I would.

In short, this has knocked me from going to the UC (University of California)system, into the CCC (California Community College) system.

That bill you talk about from Military.Com is the wrong one.

http://www.military.com/education/content/gi-bill/20-top-faqs-for-the-new-gi-bill.html

 

Oh please Colin Powell is intelligent enough to read the law.

Cheney's new book has a lot to say about Powell's opposition to Bush's war on Iraq..

 

I'm a veteran too, so, would you please bend over? If you love veterans unconditionally you will.

No? I thought not so we can add you to the list of liberal hypocrites.

 

Cheney has a lot to say about Colin Powell in his new book.. why he was marginalized and dropped. He opposed the war on Iraq.

 

Kerry is the worst scum bag in American politics so the Idea that republicans hate Powell like they hate Kerry is pretty funny.

I lost respect for Powell too so I guess I would agree with Cheney. I was sad that Powell turned out to be as liberal as he is.

 

Powell wasn't a liberal.. He was a patriot and could see what the Neocons were doing.

 

You are confusing liberal with veteran.

I have no idea who Mirka is.