Comments (55)

Jeffrex wrote on April 5, 2007 12:54 PM:

Is it only me, or does this guy look like Wierd Al?

Anonymous wrote on April 5, 2007 12:56 PM:

"...United States Army General Tommy Franks, according to Bob Woodward's 2004 Plan of Attack, described Feith as the "fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth.."

CF wrote on April 5, 2007 12:58 PM:

Damn: beat me to the punch!

Jeffrex set it up, ___ knocked it down.

sd wrote on April 5, 2007 1:05 PM:

wierd al or there's a problem down south that is waiting ever-so-impatiently to get this photo-shoot over with...

pj in jesusland wrote on April 5, 2007 1:11 PM:

Feith proves yet again how PowerPoint bullets can do far worse damage than individual AK-47 bullets.

Dr. Anatole Gavage-Huskanoy wrote on April 5, 2007 1:21 PM:

For my money, nothing beats this: "Days after 9/11, a senior Pentagon official lamented the lack of good targets in Afghanistan and proposed instead U.S. military attacks in South America or Southeast Asia as "a surprise to the terrorists," according to a footnote in the recent 9/11 Commission Report. The unsigned top-secret memo, which the panel's report said appears to have been written by Defense Under Secretary Douglas Feith..."

It really sums it up about that guy.

bethincary wrote on April 5, 2007 1:22 PM:

Perhaps Mr. Feith always wants to claim that the other sisde is guilty of something-when it is this administration that is guilty of the same things. I would like to know why GW continues to hide the fact that his first partner (silent ) in Harkin E. was Salim Bin Laden-Osama's brother. Odd huh? I would like to know what happened to record of Salim Bin Laden dying in a plane crash while piloting his private plane in Houston. I would like to know what the FBI has done with the files of people interviewed onboard Suncruz casinos who saw Atta meeting Abramoff just before the WTC. I would like to know why the Federal Reserve had a warning Aug 2 about poss. terrorist activity which was withdrawn. What about the put upons in airlines-the money pulled out in $100 increments? What about these things?

Uncle Mike wrote on April 5, 2007 1:24 PM:

Terrific ad placement below the fold for high blood pressure meds on my page.

dmg wrote on April 5, 2007 1:25 PM:

the delusion/con that changed the nation and the planet distilled to 75 words on a powerpoint slide.
impressive, really.

p.s. security code: screw

jGE wrote on April 5, 2007 1:27 PM:

RE: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" - my wife uses a similar argument to 'show' our young girls that Santa Claus really exists. It goes something like: "Well, no one has proven that he doesn't exist..."

ManagedChaos wrote on April 5, 2007 1:35 PM:

While looking at this propaganda slideshow and how it talks about Zarqawi in northern Iraq, it reminded me of a story from MSNBC. I wonder why we didn't take Zarqawi out? Read the last paragraph.

Avoiding attacking suspected terrorist mastermind
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601

But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself — but never pulled the trigger.

The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council.

“Here we had targets, we had opportunities, we had a country willing to support casualties, or risk casualties after 9/11 and we still didn’t do it,” said Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst with the Brookings Institution.

The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq.

“People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president’s policy of preemption against terrorists,” according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it.

Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.

Jane wrote on April 5, 2007 1:37 PM:

re: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" that's why there really is an elephant under my chair, here, pull my finger.

jimbo92107 wrote on April 5, 2007 1:41 PM:

"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

Wow. So, just because everybody said Dan Quayle was brainless, that meant he was really a genius!

And if there's no smoke, you can bet there must be a raging fire!

When true-believers get in power, this is what you get: magical conspiracies, secret cabals, and total corruption.

Rusty wrote on April 5, 2007 1:44 PM:

Another thing that drives me bats*$t crazy in Feith's presentation and other administration claims is the repitious observation that so and so went to Iraq or went through Iraq on their way someplace else.

Well, that happens. People who do things go places. It doesn't mean the place they went to was complicit in the things they did. That would be like saying that if I rob a liquor store here in Wake County after work, then drove through Durham County on my way home to drink the pilfered liquor, that Durham County was somehow in on the crime. It is, perhaps, the dumbest justification for the Iraq "terrorist" links.

So what defense sector job are they hiding this smarmy-looking b@$^@&d in now?

litigatormom wrote on April 5, 2007 1:49 PM:

Absence of evidence does not = evidence of absence. If you have a motive to hide something, the something must exist and you must be hiding it.

I wonder how the Bushies would feel if this new standard for deciding to invade other countries became the standard for deciding guilt or innocence in a criminal proceeding? Or impeachment?

Just sayin.'

Anonymous wrote on April 5, 2007 2:01 PM:

It would be helpful to know what G15 salary grade employees participated in the development of the report and presentation. I recall that the fellow who peddled the story that misrepresented the John Kerry photograph in Iraq, worked directly for Feith in the Office of Special Plans.

shrubsy wrote on April 5, 2007 2:03 PM:

OK, here's the thing. Rove, Cheney, Feith, and all the rest...but especially ROVE.
They have a certain pathology...used car salesman, toxic chemical spill spokesperson ITIS.....we will call it.

They have learned simple tricks. Like Rove starting out with his "have you got Prince Albert in a can?" "Well you better let him out!" Prank Phone Calls. He of course graduated to "I have placed a bomb underneath the AirConditioner near your east window" type phone pranks....and of course to others like "The FBI is investigating a listening device in my office which might have been placed by my opponent" and papering a neighborhood with vile, racist slogans and putting his opponents name/logo on the Header.

They know where every dirty trick is. They HUNT for the things which do not have oversight, where all the stuff can happen off the record. Planting Moles. EVERY dirty phone prank. That is how they get things done. Real neat people, heh?

They say things that cannot be proven or disproven. They'll take the slightest musings of a rightwing thinktank and turn them into Holocaust scenarios. Mistakes were made. Were any laws broken? Absolutely Not. (their fallback position)

Yeah, so these guys are the cream of the crop. What worthy leaders. What strength. What charisma! If there is a loophole, or a weak statute, or a dirty crumbhole backdoor they can crawl thru instead of using the frontdoor...that is where you will find them. Hiding in the shrubs. Lighting a bag of dogshit on fire. Ringing your doorbell.

Codeword: meat

Schnormal wrote on April 5, 2007 2:06 PM:

between this photo of feith and the giant ann coulter ad in tpm's main column, you guys are killing me ;)

Hana wrote on April 5, 2007 2:08 PM:

Sending in the troops should be our last option when it comes to establishing national security in countries abroad. Genocides like that in Sudan, and what happened in Somalia should never be allowed to happen again. Our soldiers are warriors, not peacekeepers. This is the primary reason why they have such a difficult time in un-warlike scenarios, like in Iraq. The enemy is not clearly defined as fighting goes on in the midst of everyday civilian life.
As a nation, in order to preserve our own security should help establish other secure nations, not by military means. Hunger and poverty are petri dishes for militants, terrorists, and sociopaths. Eliminating the growth sites for such terrible things would reduce the need for immediate military action. It would also, be less expensive and possibly even make money. As those who are impoverished move out of poverty and begin to develop all nations involved could begin to profit in a healthy, sustainable way.

Redshift wrote on April 5, 2007 2:15 PM:

Feith and Weird Al Yankovic -- separated at birth?

CE wrote on April 5, 2007 2:18 PM:

Listening painfully to Cheney on the Rush Limpbow show today, it is obvious they are still using the same bullshit rhetoric today. Amazing. Obviously they know there are still some fools out here, and they are recycling the old rhetoric.

lower tiberius wrote on April 5, 2007 2:18 PM:

Feith needs to be indicted and prosecuted to the fullest extent of any existing laws and some new ones to cover his hideous unrestrained unrepentent creative willingness to fabricate "evidence" to span the distance from point A to point B and all and any points beyond. Same for Wolferwitz (strange I was hoping for "garlic" or silver-bullet but the code word is moon)

lower tiberius wrote on April 5, 2007 2:21 PM:

oh and by the way .... to me that picture looks less like Weird Al than it does Dr Spengler? from the ghost-busters

lower tiberius wrote on April 5, 2007 2:23 PM:

collects molds spores and fungi

SteinL wrote on April 5, 2007 2:26 PM:

Hmmm - I think I have figured out how to do serious intelligence work.

First make a statement: Wouldn't it be neat if cars could fly?

Then offer a postulate: The ability to make cars fly, though not proven, is not unlikely. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Then start digging:
Reports indicate that several 1950s issues of Popular Mechanics, all with flying cars on their covers, have been spotted in the garbage bin of senior Honda executives.

Honda executives were also spotted at a dinner in a restaurant in Prague, with two of them making flying gestures with their hands and arms, to a generally positive reaction from the other diners at their table.
During a Karaoke session in a bar, following the restaurant visit, one of the executives chose "Fly me to the moon" for his performance.

This leads you to an inference: It is possible that Honda is considering manufacturing automobiles with flight features that cover both orbital and extraorbital mission capabilities.

Then a warning: Honda allowing the general public access to such flight capabilities would pose a serious threat to our fixed and orbital military and public infrastructure.

Leading to a recommendation: It is therefore advisable that all Honda plants around the world be seized or demolished; and that Honda personnel, regardless of their clearance, be sequestered.

***

In the words of General Franks: Feith really is the "fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth."

SteinL wrote on April 5, 2007 2:32 PM:

BTW - shouldn't he at least be able to spell BRIEFING right?
Someone has it pencilled as BREIFING on the cover page.

Also - what's with the date in the upper right corner?

as per 11 March 2005?

Jim Dandy wrote on April 5, 2007 2:45 PM:

There is a need to re-emphasize the specific role of the media in pushing Feith's faith-based "intelligence".

I remember, with disgust, the mealy-mouthed Stephen Hayes (of the Weekly Standard) who went around, with great fanfare, giving interviews on all the networks, touting the "inside information" leaked to him by Feith and other propagandists in Cheney's shop. At the time, he was heralded by the other talking heads as a "respected journalist". So, where is he now?

FMJ wrote on April 5, 2007 2:46 PM:

What Feith was doing here is something called 'red' analysis. It's the same thing Wolfowitz did in 1970s with Team B and Rumsfeld did in the 1990s with the Rumsfeld Commission. Basically, you start with an assumption based on what you believe your enemies' goals are, then try to find evidence that supports the assumption. That's why the first half of the slide show deals with Iraq/Al-Qaida's motives for cooperation: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Feith picks out high-level contacts. Some exaggerated, some imagined, some real. He leaves out that every govt in the Middle East had contacts with Bin Laden in some shape or form in the 1990s. US allies like Jordan, Qatar, Egypt, even Israel would have had a run in with an AQ lieutenant at some point.

But it doesn't matter if there's very little to find or even contradictory evidence. Red analysis assumes your enemy is trying to hide his actions from you. The enemy is assumed to have distorted the evidence through denial and deception (counterintelligence terms). That's why Feith criticises the Intelligence Community for not seeing through Iraq and Al-Qaida's "operational security." He thinks the CIA et al are just chumps, falling for Saddam's deception. What more evidence of a relationship do you need than the complete lack of evidence of a relationship?

If you think red analysis a really stupid way to do things, you'd be right. All it does is provide excuses to believe what you already believed in the first place. For all intents and purposes, it's indistinguishable from propaganda. Feith can't see it that way, though. He's a true believer. I can't believe he teaches at Georgetown. Georgetown, for pete's sake. He's the stupidest fucking man on the face of the earth. Where is the justice in that?

Bradley wrote on April 5, 2007 2:50 PM:

"Days after 9/11, a senior Pentagon official lamented the lack of good targets in Afghanistan and proposed instead U.S. military attacks in South America or Southeast Asia as "a surprise to the terrorists,"

What's so bad about this? Had we bombed Paraguay in the days after 9/11, wouldn't the terrorists have been surprised? It would have been shockingly unpredictable.

D. Feith wrote on April 5, 2007 3:00 PM:

Let's blow some shit up!

LST wrote on April 5, 2007 3:16 PM:

Now it's all out there in black and white--the Bush Administration's misuse and intelligence for political ends, thanks to Senator Levin. Will the MSM get it? Will they cover this nail-in-Bush's coffin story? I'm not sure.
LST

E-dog9 wrote on April 5, 2007 3:22 PM:

So what song would Weird Al parody to describe this administration’s run up to the Iraq War?

Maybe the Monkey's Valerie?

Perhaps too obvious... need something a little more light hearted to deal with such a tragic subject.

I think Run DMC’s its tricky is more appropriate.

"This speech is my recital, I think it's very vital.

"To Ir-ock (we bomb), to fight (islam)" you know the rest....

E-dog9 wrote on April 5, 2007 3:30 PM:

Or maybe Run DMC's King of Rock...

Rock rhymes so well with Iraq and well King and W. you know...

dc wrote on April 5, 2007 3:38 PM:

My favorite excerpt from the briefing comes from the final page listing the "Findings":

"Some indications of possible Iraqi coordination with al Qaida specifically related to 9/11"

Nice.

Anonymous wrote on April 5, 2007 3:40 PM:

Wierd Al song that accurately describes the "selling" of the war. Mr. Popeil! Ask yourself (in a grumbly Cheney voice), now how much would you pay?

http://www.com-www.com/weirdal/mrpopeil.html

Austin Cooper wrote on April 5, 2007 4:06 PM:

Douglas Feith -- what an honorable product of our culture. What a stalwart defender, what a lying, despicable, self-promoting, potential war criminal.

Some may think that last is a joke, at the moment. But what happens when the United States no longer has the international political muscle to protect him -- because our cultural balkanization, the deterioration of our influence among other countries, is a situation *he helped create* with his fabrications and outright lies?

If and when other countries demand an investigation of the Iraq war, and if an indictment is ever handed down with his name on it... In the meantime, he's just one more sociopathic idiot to contend with.

Grome wrote on April 5, 2007 4:25 PM:

In a related story, remember that Osama's capture is a success that hasn't happened yet......like Charlize Theron begging me to marry her.........

Nick wrote on April 5, 2007 4:57 PM:

What you want to bet that Dougie never saw any kind of military service? Worst kind of chickenshit hawk.

fairenough wrote on April 5, 2007 5:23 PM:

Given the Bush hallmark of promoting and appointing the least competent (and least aware that they're not up to the job) people to crucial positions, I hesitate to apply characteristics of strategy or calculation to Doug Feith. His work seems pitiably immature, underorganized, and transparently lame. Like a fifth grader who tried to wing a report without reading the book but had a couple of ideas about what might fool the teacher, Feith is embarrassing. And so dangerous. But it is no wonder Bush likes him. He probably, too, thought it was unfair to have to provide footnotes.

g-dub wrote on April 5, 2007 5:38 PM:

Let's blow some shit up!

Posted by: D. Feith
Date: April 5, 2007 03:00 PM

ya-hoo! you get the nitro, i'll get the beer!

Rita wrote on April 5, 2007 6:12 PM:

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". I wonder if Senator Leahy will use this maxim in response to Sen. Hatch's whining about the lack of evidence of wrongdoing in the USA Purge scandal? This reliance of the Bush gang on Madison Avenue sound bites to justify invading and occupying another country is frightening enough. That the sound bites were uncritically accepted by the media and the American people is more frightening.

Node of Evil wrote on April 5, 2007 6:13 PM:

I'm curious about the redacted text below or above "Draft Working Papers" on each page. They seem to identify that these slides belong to a set of documents. Maybe they have the name of the person who stamped them for approval as declassified. If so, why is it redacted? A small matter, but I'm curious nonetheless. I wonder about that date on the first page, "as per 11 Mar 2005" as well. Was this thing updated as they received new information? If so, who did the updating?

MaryCh wrote on April 5, 2007 6:22 PM:

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

Hah!

As Bill Nye, the Science Guy responds to various sci-wackos: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

Of course, Feith's statement, which sounds like a dress rehearsal for Cheney's 1 percent probability analysis, is just one of many IOKIYAR corollaries, so unfortunately Bill Nye isn't apposite.

Sorry for wasting everyone's time. But hey, thanks for the photo - I know about books, covers, judgment etc., but with Mr. Feith I'm inclined to make an exception. {and appropriately enough, my code word is 'potato'}

MaryCh wrote on April 5, 2007 6:34 PM:

Er, that judgment being agreement with Gen. Franks.

Anonymous wrote on April 5, 2007 8:51 PM:

shame - is the word

and yes, I feel shame about saying that

If only bushco felt shame....

AlanDownunder wrote on April 5, 2007 11:08 PM:

Ten screens full of comment and no-one yet mentions Feith's well-documented Likudnik connections. Has AIPAC, despite its criminal connections, got the whole USA bluffed by charges of anti-semitism that are as trumped up as Feith's "intelligence"?

anon wrote on April 6, 2007 1:54 AM:

... Lighting a bag of dogshit on fire. Ringing your doorbell...

That's not just Feith, that's the whole administration.

And, hey, yeah, it seems like his Likud connections are a big part of his career. Has anyone ever sorted out if he was fired and/or his security clearance removed for leaking NSC stuff to Israel? His wiki page is a little vague about the details.

chris from boca wrote on April 6, 2007 7:42 AM:

dumbest man alive

uniskywriter wrote on April 6, 2007 3:56 PM:

What are the standards for honesty, competence and truth in government for making war? Maybe these standards ought to be raised especially since there were so many misrepresentations on the Vietnam War. Where is our vaulted system of check and balances for both the Vietnam War and now the Iraq War under the leadership of democrats and republicans?

guy2k wrote on April 7, 2007 3:55 AM:

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. . . Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. . . where have I heard that before. . . oh, yeah--Donald Rumsfeld!

Rummy definitely said this AFTER the invasion, sometime in 2003, when he had troops rooting around in the sand looking for the WMDs his Admin knew weren't there. . . . Words of encouragement, I guess.

I wonder if Rumsfeld was quoting Feith's slide or Feith was just parroting his boss to kiss up.

Parnell wrote on April 7, 2007 8:03 AM:

Yesterday I listened to a recording of Cheney describing the Al Qaeda / Saddam link on Rush Limbaugh and the most disturbing part of it was that he sounded like he was describing a series of military victories for the U.S.- things like, "We ran him (Zarqawi) out of Afghanistan..." "We killed him in Baghdad ... etc." All in this pseudo-competent tone. It seems he really believes the crap he sells.

Tony Foresta wrote on April 8, 2007 12:41 AM:

Now that any sane individual or any individual capable of reading is exposed to the terrible fact, and grim truth that the fascist warmongers and profiteers in tyrannical dictatorship - I mean Bush government intentionally DECEIVDED the American people and congress to justify the bloody, costly, noendinsight horrorshow and excuse for wanton profiteering in Iraq - it begs the even more disturbing question of why.

Why would our socalled leadership lurch to such extremes to pathologicaly lie to the American people and hurl our daughters and son to the ill-conceived, poorly planned and woefully unaccounted for, wayward misadventure and catastrophic FAILURE in Iraq?

Why would the fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government attack Iraq who had nothing to do with 9/11, no operational links with al Quaida, no WMD, and who posed no threat to America?

It's all about the oil!!!

"Deliver us from evil!"

Kathleen wrote on April 8, 2007 3:03 PM:

Hello (D) Senator Rockerfeller ...Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Please!

(R)Senator Pat Roberts did everything he could do to delay, distort and destroy this investigation. Somehow it was more important for a Republican controlled congress to investigate and impeach a President who lied about a blow job under oath, rather than investigate an INTELLIGENCE SNOWJOB conducted on the American people. .

Please get on with it.

At the very least our Reps need to hold those responsible for the creation and dessimination of this false pre-war intelligence. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people and American soldiers are dead and injured due to the mis-use of this false intelligence. Holding those responsible ACCOUNTABLE is the very least you can do to honor the lives lost in this war of choice,

PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

Anonymous wrote on April 8, 2007 3:04 PM:

INVESTIGATE
DE-ESCALATE
OR LOSE IN 2008!

Jane wrote on May 25, 2007 12:38 PM:

Cute but dangerous: not voting for Democrats in '08 elects Republicans. The Republicans figured that out well enough that they started funding the Greens. Some of the Greens see voting not as a means of establishing a Government but as a way to demonstrate their purity.

So it has to go to the much less invigorating
INVESTIGATE
DE-ESCALATE
OR SEE ME IN THE PRIMARIES SUPPORTING A CANDIDATE WHO IS AT LEAST A BIT BETTER THAN YOU AND WHO CAN DEFEAT THE RETHUGLICAN