Digg

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

(Video) Colin Powell: Close Guantanamo Now, Restore Habeas

thinkprogress.org — This morning on NBC ’s Meet the Press, Gen. Colin Powell strongly condemned the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, calling it “a major problem for America’s perception” and charging, “if it was up to me, I would close Guantanamo — not tomorrow, this afternoon.”

Bury

pitviper 341 days ago, made popular 340 days ago

1552 diggs
digg it

readthis, on 10/11/2007, -6/+76Powell is absolutely right. What was wrong with the US justice system? It has worked for more than 200 years.

Olbermann and guest agree: Suspending habeas corpus has made us less safe
http://www.digg.com/political_opinion/Olbermann_guest_Suspending_habeas_corpus_has_made_us_less_safe
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Olbermann_hopeful_on_restoration_of_Habeas_0608.html
- TomPlansMedia, on 10/11/2007, -18/+39im a democrat, but i still wish this guy would run for president. its nice to see reasonable, logical candidates that know what they're talking about. the republican party has no credibility right now, but powell always has.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+44@Jason, I totally agree. There's no going back after he made a mockery of international law and common sense. If he didn't have the good sense to say no, or just quit, he's unfit to lead the nation in the top post.
  
  But if he wants to do some good now, he'll go testify about when and how the decision was made to invade Iraq.
- Tsen, on 10/11/2007, -2/+37Y'know, we've been saying this all along, but I'm glad he's finally spoken up about it. If nothing else, at least I can show this video clip to my staunch, far right-wing family. They won't listen to "crazy liberals", but my dad idolizes this guy. He could seriously make some Republicans think twice...
- skyshock1, on 10/11/2007, -13/+5He's not talking about closing it because it's a rotten facility, he's talking about closing it and moving all the prisoners elsewhere to some other equally abhorrant holding place that doesn't get the publicity that Gitmo does. He would close it purely as a PR move. It's like, "okay guys they're onto us now, we have to move it somewhere secret". Take it away and the Democrats have less ammunition to use against the Republicans.
- littlebylittle, on 10/11/2007, -16/+10Mitt Romney wants to "Double the size of GITMO." He said so in the debates. I'm sure Mitt is vastly smarter than Colin Powell regarding issues of geopolitics.
- SmokedL, on 10/11/2007, -4/+24I suggest that anyone that thinks these statements by Colin is proof of his character see the interview again and actually listen to WHY he would close Guantanamo. He would close it because it is politically inconvenient. Because it is costly to the way that the US is viewed around the world. He is not concerned that it might be wrong, just that it is detrimental to the reputation of the US. I'd hardly call that a great moral stance on the matter. About the only thing he said that I agree with is that the prisoners at Guantanamo should be handled by the criminal justice system, not some modern day torture camp.
- littlebylittle, on 10/11/2007, -10/+3/sarc
- kidd3ckz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5@cGt2099
  
  I ***** live here and I hate it more and more each day.
- ryanissuper, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1@skyshock
  "he's talking about closing it and moving all the prisoners elsewhere to some other equally abhorrant holding place"
  No, he's talking about moving them to the federal judicial system, like any other suspected criminal.
  
  @littlebylittle
  "I'm sure Mitt is vastly smarter than Colin Powell regarding issues of geopolitics."
  Are you just trolling? Colin Powell was the Secretary of State and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Mitt Romney has next to no experience in geopolitics.
- SmokedL, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10@cGt2099
  "Isn't that reason one of many as to why it would be a good idea? Countries across the world have lost a lot of faith in the United States, and the foreign viewpoint is very negative.
  
  I come from Australia. We're your allies, and the Australian viewpoint (as well as the UK viewpoint) is the most negative towards the USA its ever been!"
  
  Almost unanimous global condemnation certainly is an indication that you should reconsider whatever practice is being condemned. You'll get no disagreement from me on that.
  
  What I am saying is this: If the first thing that makes you question the practices at Guantanamo is global condemnation, rather than your personal ethics and morals, just what do your ethics and morals consist of? Certainly not the stuff that I would like any representative of mine to use for their decisions.
  
  If you need years of global condemnation to realize that throwing away the Geneva Convention and torturing people held in violation of international law is wrong; I do not want you in any sort of influential position anywhere.
  
  By the way; I'm not an American, I'm a swede. Not that that should make any difference to the discussion at hand.
- dn11, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1so disappointing he didn't speak out at the beginning of this disaster
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4"so disappointing he didn't speak out at the beginning of this disaster"
  
  The fact that he didn't speak out at the beginning, but went along with the criminal actions of the Bush-Cheney mis-administration, speaks volumes more than ANYTHING he can say NOW, as the election season is approaching.
  
  Although he is last on my list, he is still ON the list of those who need to be tried and convicted, etc., for their high crimes against the Constitution.
  (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Ashcroft, Rove, Gonzales, Snow, Powell. ) Did I miss any of the traitors?
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@tomplansmedia, "im a democrat, but i still wish this guy would run for president. its nice to see reasonable, logical candidates that know what they're talking about. the republican party has no credibility right now, but powell always has."
  
  He's a rational guy. His entire political career was derailed by signing off on that one statement in the State of the Union address and beating the war drums at the UN a few weeks later. I could forgive him for the SotU thing, but I don't know if I can look past his speech to the UN. Part of me thinks he was heavily manipulated, but I don't know. It's a shame. He could have been a great politician. Great politician ...heh ...I just thought up a new oxymoron!
- HappyScrappy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2'He would close it because it is politically inconvenient. Because it is costly to the way that the US is viewed around the world. He is not concerned that it might be wrong, just that it is detrimental to the reputation of the US.'
  
  That's not true.
  
  He said he'd close it because we can deal with these people in the standard legal way, with then having access to lawyers and such. He points out we managed to put 2M people in jail even though they had access to lawyers.
  
  He says he'd close it because it shows we are ignoring basic rights laid out in our Constitution. And it shows that on the world stage.
  
  That's the right stand, and he's taking it.
  
  It's too bad you are twisting his words to try to say he's only worried about bad press and not what is right. If he were worried about the press, I don't think he'd have gotten on Meet the Press today and ate crow all over the place.
- Fordi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The thing you have to remember about any military man: they follow orders. If the president says, 'Go and make the dumbest speech of your life to the UN', he doesn't even ask 'what's the content'. He makes the damned speech.
  
  The fact that he's speaking out now means that he simply wasn't ordered not to.
- PsychoticClown, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Isn't this is the same asshole that served as Bush's bitch and tried to sell the Iraqi invasion to the world? So now he discovered his conscience? Hypocritical asshole. Where was this conscience when he was in power?
- bigturns, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Jasonquinn, "Instead he acted like a lackey and gave that humiliating speech to the UN even when you could clearly see he didn't believe it himself."
  
  True - However, I believe Powell, somewhat complacent of the machine as it pushed towards an inevitable war, took the appropriate steps to clear his name by leaving W's administration at the end of W's first term. If you remember the events, Powell's departure was seen as a serious blow to W's credibility.
  
  http://www.defenddemocracy.org/in_the_media/in_the_media_show.htm?doc_id=249049
  
  I believe the only man who truly understood, at the point in time when Powell gave his famous speech to the UN, what intel was good and what intel was false was the man who has, to date, made the most of the war in Iraq (Dick 'Vader' Cheney).
  
  Such a statement doesn't clear Powell's name. It does, however, attempt to paint Powell into a circle separate from those who have sullied our name.
hawkeye17, on 10/11/2007, -4/+74Too bad he wasn't this outspoken when he was in the Administration. I totally agree with what he's saying here but it's way too little and way too late.
- aschocobo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+42agreed. it's good to hear Powell speak out about this, but this kind of nerve would have been much more useful to have when he was busy pointing out those useless satellite photos.
- workfaster, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Remember when everyone thought he'd make a decent president? If it took him this long to do the right thing, then I think it's safe to say that he would have been only slightly less disastrous than Bush.
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16When you spend your entire life in the military, you learn to follow orders. I think speaking out against the President while he was working for him would have gone against every fiber of Powell's existence. He did show great leadership skills in the military, however. You must simultaneously lead and follow to be a good soldier, and I think if Powell had been put in the ultimate leadership position (the Presidency) he might have done extremely well.
  
  Like many others, however, I feel too betrayed now to vote for him as President. I'm happy to see him seeking to atone for some of his past mistakes. I think he is a deeply honorable man who was put in a situation he wasn't prepared to handle.
- Ajajadude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I don't know how he could have stood all that crap he was forced to say and "think" publicly if this is how he really feels.
- Bedeo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0 If we look past his role in justifying the Iraq war for a moment -people do screw up, afterall- then it seems that he is at least trying to achieve something positive. Clearly he knows more about the situation than the current administration does, mabey something can be taking from this.
  
  His comments on Guantanamo and his point that American has managed to put 2 million people in jail, even though they had lawyers, are particularly important.
Alex76, on 10/11/2007, -15/+3Good job. Colin, it's not too late, please run for President...
iDragonFly, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25You know the wheels are about to fall off when Colin Powell strays this far from BushCo's script.

I'm curious as to what compelled him to speak out.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+34attempted redemption, now that it's safe to go against Bush.
- faskill, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8@entropyman - well said.
Babykitkat, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6Colin Powell is no Angel
- thepuma77, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1 He's not?!?
  
  All these years have passed just to find this out now.
  
  Now my eyes have been opened.
VtmnR, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5You know, he did say:

"My preferred way of fighting wars is to never let anybody think that they could win one against us. I want to be the bully on the block."
"I believe in the bully's way of going to war. 'I'm on a street corner, I got my gun, I got my blade, I'ma kick yo' ass."

from Imperial Designs, Garry Dorrien (2004)
http://www.amazon.com/Imperial-Designs-Neoconservatism-New-Americana/dp/0415949807
swordedge, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8Not only close the prison, blow up all the buildings there and abandon the place. We don't need it.

Also , leave the base in Saudi Arabia. It causes more problems than it solves.
- Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3and the one in Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, Germany.....
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1...and don't forget all the internment camps being built throughout the US, for US citizens. loyal to the Constitution, who don't comply with their 'Plan'.
- HappyScrappy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1My understanding is we are not currently using the Saudi bases. They are still there for our use in case we need to defend Saudi Arabia, as intended, but we are currently moved out to other places.
- DiggeralToolz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Colon Powell is BLACK!
- batwang, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Abandon our base in Saudi? But how would we protect the good people there (read: financial interests) without a military presence? It is so obvious the citizens want us there! Well, the citizens that have strong and long established business ties with some very nice Texans in the oil industry want us there. Wait a minute...
  /sarcasm
xenoploid, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Powell's current message is just and true. However, it is important to remember that Powell and former CIA director George Tenet were both TOOLS of the Bush administration. Their credibility is destroyed, and they are attempting to save face. They are the ones who went to the UN and made claims about WMDs to justify the Iraq War without credible and significant evidence about an imminent threat to the US. Bush gave them orders to build a case for war, and they carried them out while leaving their morals behind.
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Excellent point. The claim "I was just doing my job" is NEVER adequate justification for all kinds of horrors people inflict on one another, while 'following the orders' of others. Having no backbone, and having a willingness to blindly follow orders, is true cowardice.
  That same principle can be seen as applying to soldiers, police, or anyone in any business hierarchy -- who so easily puts their morals aside, when convenient.
  
  If you take another human being's life, for example, it is ultimately YOUR responsibility, regardless of who else told you to do it.
  
  It is about growing up, and learning to accept self-responsibility.
  And if you cause or order another to take a life, you get double the karma, having defiled both yourself and your 'tool' who blindly followed your order.
  
  The 'tool' gets, also, the karma of having inappropriately empowered another, who was 'less than enlightened', of having facilitated another's lowest desires, by carrying them out.
  
  Any way you look at it, it's baaaad. M'kay?
gmavz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3It's a good thing no one on this site will ever get elected to any office... It's the same lack of knowledge in the political system that leads to things like the Bush administration.
Give me (-) if you agree
ptsd, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8seems like everyone has forgotten that colin powell is the same man who tried to cover up the My Lai massacre...
- Grouser, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2And he's a big friend of heroin dealer Richard Armitage. Google "Richard Armitage heroin" to see what I mean.
  
  Nevertheless, his statements about Guantanamo are right on...
DokGonzo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5Powell is full of it. He wasn't the least bit concerned 6 years ago, so why should he be concerned now?
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Did you ever watch Colin Powell while he was Secretary of State? He looked tortured the entire time. I fault him for not having the courage of his convictions, but I think saying he wasn't concerned is unfair.
- DokGonzo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5Tortured? I guess he was tortured when he lied in the U.N. as well? Please. He's as guilty as the rest of them. If there was justice he and the rest of the Bush administration would be charged with conspiracy and treason.
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I'm going to retract my use of the word tortured, because in this day in age it seems less than appropriate. When I watched his UN speech and other propaganda speeches, it always seemed to me as if he did so with a heavy heart. You could see the conflict on his face, unlike Condoleeza Rice who routinely lies with a smile on her face and a song in her heart.
sureuhhuh, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4When Colin Powell gave his U.N. speech, although the "facts" he spoke of were questionable to say the least, the public trusted him they and bought it. I agree wholeheartedly that Guantanamo should be closed and I also question who is telling him to say so now.
Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2If I'm being sceptical I would say there is an element of him wanting to extend his career but the Bush expiry - which should never be allowed to happen in lieu of what has been carried out by his office in the past.

That said whatever his motives may be, if the results are the same, Gitmos closes and Habeas Corpus is returned then good on him for speaking out in the way he has chosen to, however late it is in coming.
ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Thank god someone finally said it!
origclubsoda, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Note - he is saying to close it for politics, not because it is wrong.
- PatriotOne, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Duly noted. I had the same thought.
ATHEISTinHELL, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6hes not a loyal Bushie.
Arkonnan, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Yeah, sure, close Guantanamo now.. And relocate its populace to a much larger encampment. Afterall, we're going to need the extra space after Iran forces us to invade their country.
AdvancedSoul, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4If you are your own enemy who can oppose you? They are not going to close Guantanamo or restore Habeas Corpus, and this is just a distraction so that no one really does anything to stop them.
MacintoshSauce, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Powell should come out and bash Bush and then announce that he is running for President.
- WaterDragon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3That sounds like a Rove strategy. Since Bush can't legitimately have a third term, it makes the other criminal republi-pigs look better, to the shortsighted public, if they appear to oppose Bush.
  
  Unfortunately, neither of Bush's terms were 'legitimate'.
  
  While people argue over politics and elections, and who said what, and what it really means, those criminals continue to build their internment camps, and plan their next false-flag attack, so they can try to declare martial law.
  
  And the only thing that makes that possible to perpetrate, is the hordes of armed and trained young men, in the military , State national guard, and police forces, who would just follow orders, without thinking, and without truly understanding anything of the Constitution they are supposed to be defending.
  
  But they sure know about all the latest i-pod products and bands!
  Corporato-cratic Fascism marches on!
  Buy more, kill when you are told to, and don't think or ask questions!
PatriotOne, on 10/11/2007, -6/+4Until Colin Powell comes out with the same amount of passion he used to sell this war in Iraq and admit he lied and this whole war was based on lies and that 9/11 was an inside job, he will never be able to regain the confidence I once had in him. He may be using words I agree with now, but it is too little, too late.

If he wants my respect back, he better start singing like a canary!
- macfan76, on 10/11/2007, -6/+49/11 an inside job? What a dumb ass!
- mkaylor, on 10/11/2007, -5/+0You my friend should be institutionalized for saying such a stupid comment. Apparently you are no more than 12 year old and know no better. You can have all the conspiracy theories you would like but 9/11 is not one of them. What a dumb dick! And you call yourself PatriotOne? I don't think so. Least not for these United States of America.
johnnelson, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Powell for President! I think he would be one of our better choices. Too bad his wife won't allow it!
talkenglish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Too late my friend, should of stood up a long time ago if he really cared about the insidious manner Guantanamo bay and other such "terror fighting" mechanisms have slowly slaughtered individual rights.
txpenguin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Better late than never. I too wish Powell had objected earlier to Gitmo and the Iraq War, because it's clear he has had a lot of reservations about both for some time now. Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Powell's chief of staff at the State Dept. has spoken out even more than Powell about the way that Feith, Wolfowitz et al got us into this mess. There are a lot of rumors that at least a few flag officers might not be so eager to cooperate in starting any more no-win wars, torture camps, etc. Maybe rather than playing the "good soldier" to the end, the way that Powell did, they will stand up and resign before participating in further insanity in Iran and elsewhere.
immrlizard, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Where were all of these thoughts 6 years ago. He lost all respect that i had for him by signing on with dubbya. Before then, I would have considered voting for him for president. Just because he left at half time doesn't mean that he deserves any of it back.
danarama, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2this is lip service and excuse to get attention away from the many other camps all over the world. you close gitmo and all of a sudden people think the usa is doing something about it. they're building more IN the usa right now, are they going to close them down before they even open up for business?
badarabdad, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2he has tons of evidence to show you they've got WMDs there too.
edzillion, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0so Powell has finally grown a backbone?
The modern day Belisarius ...
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Eh. Part of me thinks Powell was used like a wet rag to help make the case for war in Iraq. Before he dealt with the Bush administration maybe he had no idea how evil people could be. The last few years have wisened all of us. I doubt he'll ever let himself get taken in by the neo-cons again.
rkb2948, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Alot of people harp on powell for his role in the iraq war, but I really believe he was kept in the dark more than people realize. He at one point in time refered to a rumsfeld select few other people in the cabinent, as "***** crazies" if anything validifies in my opinion his stand on issues with the neocons. The iraq war goes against everything powell has ever said. Look at the powell doctrine, emphasizes everything he stands for, and look at this war, its been botched all over; especially in comparison to the gulf war in which powell was in chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. And now you complain that he hasn't spoken up about the disaray in Guantanamo earlier, but the only reason you hear it now is because he was on TV; the man doesn't live in the spotlight anymore. And note he has been voicing his disapproval for quite some time, remember he was one of the first (especially republicans) to term the crisis over there as a civil war.
GeezerD, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Powell for President.
tenga2001, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2speaking of generals, check out this wicked wicked BURN: http://digg.com/offbeat_news/This_is_by_far_the_best_comeback_line_in_the_history_of_one_liners

I just can't get over it!
- LucidOne, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That story is complete bunk, it NEVER happened!
HappyScrappy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2For those who didn't watch the whole interview, near the end, Russert asks Powell if he would be endorsing any political candidates. Powell said it is too soon to say that. He pushes him to ask if he would endorse candidates from other parties (than his own Republican party), and he refuses to say.

Additionally, Russert asks if Powell is interested in a political future and Powell says he isn't "interested in any elected office". Powell volunteered the "elected" line himself.

If you ask me (and you didn't), it sounds like Powell is likely to endorse Barack Obama if he is the Democratic candidate and he he leaving the door open to be appointed to a position in Obama's administration if he wins.

Could be a big coup.
Viriathus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Who gives a ***** what this obsequious toady says now? The time he could have really made a difference he utterly failed. Why do the criminals who put their mark on the latest imperial enterprise still get respect? They deserve our contempt and ridicule. The fact that some of them are contrite now and trying to restore their legacy should not change this. There should be a price for such utter moral cowardice.
jlhoben, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yes, save Habeas. Send him home to his wife and kids.
angrygalactus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Judge Andrew Napolitano (he supports Ron Paul) has been saying these things.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8QwTKKSvR8 part 1 of Andrew's speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXzUL9KkgvA part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35yhSifZ5jI part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRukPp9Tq5k part 4
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

(Video) Colin Powell: Close Guantanamo Now, Restore Habeas

Login or register to add a comment