Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Feith vs Faithless [Dan Collins]

Hitchens on the tale of two narratives, Feith’s and McClellan’s:

Feith was and is very much identified with the neoconservative wing of the Republican Party, and he certainly did not believe that Saddam Hussein was ever containable in a sanctions “box.” But he is capable of separating his views from his narrative, and this absorbing account of the interdepartmental and ideological quarrels within the Bush administration, on the Afghanistan and Guantanamo fronts as well as about Iraq, will make it difficult if not impossible for people to go on claiming that, for instance:

1) There was no rational reason to suspect a continuing Iraqi WMD threat. Feith’s citations from the Duelfer Report alone are stunning in their implications.
2) That alternatives to war were never discussed and that the administration was out to “get” Saddam Hussein from the start.
3) That the advocates of regime change hoped and indeed planned to anoint Ahmad Chalabi as a figurehead leader in Baghdad.
4) That there was no consideration given to postwar planning.

It’s also of considerable interest to learn that the main argument for adhering to the Geneva Conventions was made within the Pentagon and that the man who expressed the most prewar misgivings concerning Iraq was none other than Donald Rumsfeld. Feith doesn’t deny that he has biases of his own. One of these concerns the widely circulated charge that his own Office of Special Plans was engaged in cherry-picking and stovepiping intelligence. Another is the criticism, made by most of the neocon faction, of Paul Bremer and the occupation regime that he ran in Baghdad. In all instances, however, Feith writes in an unrancorous manner and is careful to supply the evidence and the testimony and, where possible, the actual documentation, from all sides.

Henry Waxman

77 Replies to “Feith vs Faithless [Dan Collins]”

  1. Rob Crawford says:

    BOLSHEVISTS!!!

  2. dre says:

    You neoconwarmongeringRethuglicans just can’t admit that BUSH LIED PEOPLE DIED.

  3. dre says:

    And NO BLOOD FOR OIL

  4. sashal says:

    see, rob.
    Great example of commie bastard, trotskyists wannabe alliance with neoconservatives.
    Thanks , Dan, very illustrative to my point

  5. Mikey NTH says:

    I will have to read it and then compare it to the Torch landings in North Africa in 1942. I am guessing that I am going to find some very eerie parallels.

  6. sashal says:

    #2, exactly

  7. it’s one of those days isn’t it?

  8. sashal says:

    btw, I have sent to that socialistic fascistic communistic general Shinseki a gift card to my store for calling Feith the dumbest motherfucker in the world…
    General, thank you very much…..

  9. BERETS FOR EVERYONE!!!

  10. dre says:

    “Feith the dumbest motherfucker in the world”

    America is a mean country.

  11. Roboc says:

    I’m sure that Douglas Feith will be on all the talk shows, just like Snotty.

  12. Roboc, considering that the book’s been out since the beginning of April, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

  13. Roboc says:

    I guess I’ll have to settle for C-SPAN’s bookTV.

  14. dre says:

    Also NO BLOOD FOR PIE

  15. Roboc says:

    dre, Feith can’t be the dumbest mf in the world. That title is reserved exclusively for Republican Presidents, Vice-Presidents and Presidential Candidates. Are’t you on the liberal distribution list yet.

  16. dre says:

    “Comment by Roboc on 6/3 @ 1:47 pm #

    I’m sure that Douglas Feith will be on all the talk shows, just like Snotty.”

    You can find a three hour interview by Hugh Hewitt with Doug Feith herehere.

  17. dicentra says:

    I would gladly donate a pint of blood for pie. What red-blooded American wouldn’t?

  18. Sdferr says:

    Not Shinseki. Tommy Franks.

  19. Ouroboros says:

    Hey.. Someone help me out here.. I must have missed something .. an amendment to our constitution that slipped past me while I was focussed on watching LOST (season 4) or something.. When did we start electing our Presidents as Au Pairs? Seems like just yesterday when Presidential wives had mostly symbolic roles.. Headed charities and humanitarian causes and such.. When did it become common to appoint them to to participate in the presidency? I was sure the Clinton years would have got that out of our system… This chick looks scarier than Hilly ever did.

  20. dicentra says:

    Wrong thread Ouro. We’re discussing pie and blood over here.

  21. dre says:

    ok NO BLOOD FOR ETHANOL

  22. dicentra says:

    And Feith vs. McClellan, if you’re so inclined.

    I’d like to add this to the pile; how Scotty didn’t set out to smear Bush, but his Soros-backed publisher kinda sorta pushed him that way.

    So for those keeping score, a mediocre memoir by a bumbling moron (so acknowledged by the Left) that happens to correspond with Teh Narrative is hailed as a smoking gun, whereas the heavily documented account of What Really Happened (hint: it’s complexer than complex) is libra non grata.

  23. Roboc says:

    Thanks dre, great resource!

  24. sashal says:

    dicentra, it may be a surprise for you and”liberal” media, but nothing much in the Scottie book was a revelation to majority of Americans…
    We really do not care..
    But who knows, the additional testimony may help though…
    Seems like Waxman may be interested…

  25. Roboc says:

    dicentra, then he lied to O’Reilly!

  26. dre says:

    “but nothing much in the Scottie book was a revelation to majority of Americans…”

    Certainly not the moonbats on left who wrote Snottys book.

  27. Rob Crawford says:

    dicentra, it may be a surprise for you and”liberal” media, but nothing much in the Scottie book was a revelation to majority of Americans…

    And the majority is always correct?

    How bolshevist of you.

    But who knows, the additional testimony may help though…
    Seems like Waxman may be interested…

    Bring. It. On.

    Preferably sometime in September or October of this year. Yeah, baby, let the Democrats stage a show trial! They might even be able to get their “it was da joooooooos” caucus to stay away this time.

  28. Roboc says:

    Henry Waxman is an ass leprechaun, who couldn’t even tell Roger Clemens to go fuck off, wasting time and money on a circus of a hearing.

  29. MayBee says:

    Ooh boy. Jake Tapper just got this one big time wrong at Political Punch:

    Among the stunning suggestions from Feith’s book, Hitch writes, are the admissions that there “was no rational reason to suspect a continuing Iraqi WMD threat.

  30. Terrye says:

    I don’t think most Americans care what Scott McLellan says. In fact I think most Americans are getting tired of revisiting 2003. Over and over again. Maybe Bill O’Reilley will bring Feith on, after all equal time is only fair. And I think Scott is a liar btw. An opportunistic little backstabbing shit ass.

  31. Sdferr says:

    O’Reilly is not the sort of person interested in talking with the likes of Douglas Feith. O’Reilly already knows what the story is and doesn’t want to be disturbed with facts. He is a dismissive ass.

  32. kelly says:

    Seems like Waxman may be interested…

    Dear God: please, please, please!

    BTW, that there is also what’s known as a “racetrack prayer.” The difference between this kind of prayer and the one you say in church is that this one you really mean.

  33. kelly says:

    He is a dismissive ass.

    But remember…he’s lookin’ out for YOU!

  34. kelly says:

    Speaking of Waxman, is there any truth to the rumor that he can snort whole pecans?

  35. Terrye says:

    Maybee is right. Jake Tapper just flat out can not read. He totally misrepresents what Hitch said. I left a nasty little post at Political Punch telling him to read before he posts. After all, he is supposed to be a real journalist.

  36. dicentra says:

    Jake Tapper just got this one big time wrong at Political Punch:

    That’s what you get for reading just the bullet points and not the introductory phrase. However, you have to fault Hitch a little bit for providing such a ripe opportunity for misquote. You should put your set-off text in the positive, because the chances that your reader will miss the negative intro are pretty high, even for good readers.

    I mean, the term “drive-by media” is pretty descriptive.

  37. Roboc says:

    Waxman wears his Jewfro in his nostrils!

  38. dicentra says:

    dicentra, it may be a surprise for you and ”liberal” media, but nothing much in the Scottie book was a revelation to majority of Americans…

    Wha?

    Are you talking about the “Bush used PROPAGANDA!” revelation, or the actual lack of examples of “Bush Lied”?

    Because apparently his book doesn’t reveal anything at all except that he’s a weak-minded tool, regardless of who cares to use him.

  39. MayBee says:

    dicentra- I know. I actually posted a comment to tapper’s blog pointing out the misunderstanding, but it was deleted. I’m hurt. I should have just said Bush lied us into war. That apparently is acceptable.

  40. Wha?

    I believe the term is “confirmation bias”.

  41. kelly says:

    There really is something metaphysically hilarious that Waxman should bear such a porcine countenance. I mean, if he were ever a in a Jewist Donner party and died first, I think it’s safe to say he’d stay uneaten.

  42. kelly says:

    McLellan’s kind of a porker, too. But with less integrity.

  43. McLellan’s kind of a porker, too. But with less integrity.

    I always thought he looked more like a deer in the headlights.

  44. dre says:

    YES WE PECAN!

  45. kelly says:

    Porker in the headlights?

    dre: too funny.

  46. Patrick Chester says:

    So… the majority of Americans are too lazy to go hunt down transcripts and such to see what was left out? Was that what sashal was trying to say?

  47. Terrye says:

    Maybee:

    They did the same thing to me, so I posted it again. I might send an email to Hitch, see if I can start a fight or something.

  48. Salt Lick says:

    I actually posted a comment to tapper’s blog pointing out the misunderstanding, but it was deleted.

    Did you tell him to stop being so lesbian about it?

  49. dicentra says:

    Hey, if Tapper knows he was wrong but refuses to admit it, that would be a prime example of this: that liberals have a much higher “tolerance” for dishonesty.

    Who knew?

  50. dicentra says:

    Terrye:

    Your comment, it is there, as is one I just posted. As of now, that is. We’ll see if they stay there. It is now after 5:00 pm Eastern, after all.

  51. Dan Collins says:

    Waxman looks like Lon Chaney as the Phantom of the Opera.

  52. B Moe says:

    I saw that survey last night, dicentra. Given that the sum total of the movement is using confiscated property to buy votes, it is odd how surprising it is to folks.

  53. Aldo says:

    One of these concerns the widely circulated charge that his own Office of Special Plans was engaged in cherry-picking and stovepiping intelligence.

    It would take me all day to track down a source for this, and I don’t have time now, but I remember reading that the man in Feith’s office who was responsible for all of that “Cherry-picked” and “stove-piped” intelligence subsequently went on to become a Democratic Congressman. Despite all the histrionics about war crimes he was welcomed with open arms by the Democratic caucus there.

  54. Terrye says:

    dicentra:

    That was my second one. The first one was deleted. I saw yours, very good. I also did another comment. I have a big mouth and can not help myself. I mentioned the following documentary:

    Target America . It was done in 1999 on ABC. It was all about how dangerous Saddam and Osama were. Does anyone else remember this thing? It was about terror connections.

  55. Roboc says:

    I can see Waxman turned into a can of spam. It wouldn’t detract from his chairing any congressional committees.

  56. Terrye says:

    Also:

    Once upon a time Democrats were not pussies about this sort of thing. There are still a few of them like that.

  57. Terrye says:

    That should have been Aldo not Also. Time to get off the computer, making dumb mistakes.

  58. TmjUtah says:

    This reminds me of Waxman.

  59. MayBee says:

    I think Terrye’s second comment has now been deleted. Her third one is there, as is dicentra’s.
    Hopefully they are at least reading them as they delete.

  60. Rob Crawford says:

    So… the majority of Americans are too lazy to go hunt down transcripts and such to see what was left out? Was that what sashal was trying to say?

    Well, sashal’s certainly too lazy to read a book, so he figures “who the hell’s actually going to look up what someone actually said?”

  61. sashal says:

    Hey, Rob, read this:

    Among the excerpts of the interview captured in Engel’s new book, “War Journal: My Five Years in Iraq”:

    – “‘This is the great war of our times. It is going to take forty years,’” [Bush told Engel]. “Bush said in forty years the world would know if the war on terrorism, and conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, had reduced extremism, helped moderates, and promoted democracy.”

    – Bush admits to Engel that going to war was a decision based on his personal instinct and not on any long-range strategy for the Mideast:

    “I know people are saying we should have left things the way they were, but I changed after 9/11. I had to act. I don’t care if it created more enemies. I had to act.”

    Thanks for electing an idiot….

  62. MayBee says:

    OK, the last obsessive comment about that Jake Tapper post. Terrye’s and dicentra’s comments have all been deleted. Man, I hope it is some ugly intern doing the deleting and not my dreamboat JT.

  63. Rob Crawford says:

    Hey sashal, so the fuck what? The first quote isn’t anything new, if you’ve been paying attention.

    The second quote is another “duh” moment — the president is the one who makes the final decision. He got the approval of Congress, but even after that he could have said “no”. It says nothing about whether there was or was not a long-range strategy, or what information informed his decision to act. If anything, it confirms the often-stated point that “containment” was acceptable before 9/11, but considered too risky afterward.

    Which site did you get those quotes from? Or are you actually reading a book for a change?

  64. dicentra says:

    Wow. What kind of a journalist deletes perfectly good comments?

    I did get a screen cap, though. For all the good it will do me. And I reposted my old comment. I can hit a button as long as they can.

  65. Terrye says:

    For a bunch of people who are always prattling on about freedom of speech and the right of the public to know and blah blah blah, the journos at ABC sure are high handed. Typical little hypocrites.

  66. Terrye says:

    dicentra:

    I did another comment too. The bastards. I guess I should have said that Bush is the antiChrist, that they would let stand.

  67. Rob Crawford says:

    So they’re deleting comments based solely on them not toeing the party line?

    I’m shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

  68. MayBee says:

    It’s worse than that, Rob. They are deleting comments pointing out a factual error, without correcting the error.
    I actually am kind of shocked.

  69. Merovign says:

    I think it’s kind of charming when non-lefties are surprised when lefties lie.

    It’s a charming kind of child-like innocence.

    Especially given the trolls here. I mean, hello?

  70. Rob Crawford says:

    Why are you shocked, MayBee? We’re talking about people with a penchant for rewriting history that would make Stalin blush.

  71. Aldo says:

    Didn’t Walter Duranty win a Pulitzer Prize?

  72. Dan Collins says:

    He’s got a million of ’em.

  73. dicentra says:

    My comment? Posted four times, deleted thrice.

    Here it is for the record, such as it is:

    ****

    Let me emphasize this:

    “[Feith’s book] will make it difficult if not impossible for people to go on claiming that, for instance:

    “1) There was no rational reason to suspect a continuing Iraqi WMD threat.”

    Hitch should have phrased the numbered points in the positive, but that’s no excuse for Tapper to “drive by” and fail to read ALL of the words in the right order.

  74. Patrick Chester says:

    dicentra: Who said he “failed” to do so? It’s more likely he knew what he was doing and was hoping people wouldn’t notice it.

    Of course, it’s always possible he is stupid enough to fail to notice the words in their correct context, but with the proggs, malice is a better explanation than stupidity.

  75. dicentra says:

    I used “failed” to give him the benefit of the doubt on his own blog. But it warn’t good enough to spare the ban-stick. Oh woe!

  76. The Lost Dog says:

    “Waxman looks like Lon Chaney as the Phantom of the Opera.”

    I dunno. I think he looks like the guy who goes into a public Men’s Room and picks the only stall without a door on it to take a dump in.

    He also looks like he is a natural for “South Park”.

  77. Blitz says:

    Hey, if Tapper knows he was wrong but refuses to admit it, that would be a prime example of this: that liberals have a much higher “tolerance” for dishonesty.

    Dicentra
    read the whole thing and it’s absolutely true. I was disabled for a time (broken neck) and was dying to get back into the game!!…My sister, who is so far left as to come almost to the right gamed the system and is collecting MY,YOUR, OUR taxes as we speak…over a disease that probably doesn’t exist. Fibromyalgia? spelling absolutely incorrect, but I hope you get the point…

Comments are closed.