The WaPo writes a dismissive article today on the new book written by Douglas Feith

In regards to WaPo beliefs, this excerpt from a Feith interview puts it into an interesting context:

HH: I was reading with great interest the various, I guess I can call them accounts, of the Inspector General’s report. They were fundamentally flawed and very unfair. Has the media caught up with the reality of this report yet, Mr. Feith?

DF: Not really. The main media screw-up, which was really extraordinary and very damaging, was the Washington Post on February 9th, ran a story where they had in their headline, and in their opening paragraphs, they had quotes attacking me and the work that my office did, and they said that those quotes came from the Inspector General report, when in fact, they came from office releases of Senator Levin. And it created a terrible impression, because it was purple language used to attack me, and it was attributed to the Inspector General, but it was really just from Senator Levin, and it was a terrible error. The Washington Post ran a big correction to it, but in the meantime, newspapers all over the world, and television all over the world, picked up on those false quotations, and said that I was being attacked by the Inspector General for things that the Inspector General in fact didn’t say that I did.

HH: I assume you’re familiar with Mark Twain’s a lie is halfway around the world before truth gets its boots on.

DF: I know it very well.

HH: Now, you’ve lived it. Has the truth caught up with the lie?

DF: No, it hasn’t even come close, because there’s no way in the world that the correction can get anything like the attention that the original quotations got.

While there may have been contcts, there never was enough to justify war on the basis of ties between the two.

And who in the world said that was the only reason we went to war. There were multiple reasons for it, and Bush laid them all out prior to the invasion.

it’s going to boil down to “it’s everyone’s fault save mine and Rumsfeld’s.” Sheesh.

Rofl….and this is different from the multiple books from the left on this subject that say A) Iraq was wrong and B) it was Bush’s fault alone?

Books from principals involved in any administration tend to twist the reality a bit to ensure their own legacy is not hurt as badly, and this includes the lefty administrations. Its just human nature. But there is also lots of additional evidence that show Feiths views to be correct, at least what I have read of the book so far.

But believe me, I have no illusion that lefties will suddenly believe this stuff….they have invested so much into the Bushitler world view that if they were to come to grip with reality their whole world would fall apart.

Further, remember that Feith suggested attacking targets in South America after 9/11. He offered that nobody would be expecting that. In that he was correct.

[edit] Background

I have no references on the charges you state. However, I contradict your claims that Saddam and AQ did not work together. Saddam did not love AQ, nor they him, but they did work together and Saddam gave medical aid to AQ and allowed members of the Taliban to settle in an area West-South-West of what is now the Green Zone.

http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/10/26/why-iraq/

So what has come out to “debunk that myth”??? Odd that when I was in Iraq, the Iraqis told me the only myth was Saddam not working with terrorists. He did, from the PLO (which he sent checks to homicide bomber families) to AQ (who he gave medical aid, material support, and training facilities to.

As I recall, the Democrats didn’t like that part.