{"id":933,"date":"2007-02-14T11:00:49","date_gmt":"2007-02-14T16:00:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2007\/02\/14\/coming-soon\/"},"modified":"2007-02-14T22:05:27","modified_gmt":"2007-02-15T03:05:27","slug":"coming-soon","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2007\/02\/14\/coming-soon\/","title":{"rendered":"Dear Doug,"},"content":{"rendered":"<p align=\"center\"><img decoding=\"async\" hspace=\"5\" border=\"1\" src=\"http:\/\/www.1boringoldman.com\/images\/feith.jpg\" \/><\/p>\n<p>   Douglas Feith made my day with  <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2007\/02\/13\/AR2007021301092.html\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>Tough Questions We Were Right to Ask<\/strong><\/a> in the <font color=\"#000099\"><strong>Washington Post<\/strong><\/font>. It&#8217;s like opening a time capsule on those days back in 2002 and 2003 when they were planning the invasion of Iraq. Even the title sounds like an early Bush sound-byte &#8211; &quot;Tough Questions.&quot; Then, it was, &quot;answering the hard questions.&quot; In this article, Feith says this amazing thing: <\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<div align=\"justify\">In evaluating our policy toward Iraq after Sept. 11, 2001, my office realized  that CIA analysts were suppressing some of their information. They excluded  reports conflicting with their favored theory: that the secular Iraqi Baathist  regime would not cooperate with al-Qaeda jihadists. (We now face a strategic  alliance of jihadists and former Baathists in Iraq.) Pentagon officials did not  buy that theory, and in 2002 they gave a briefing that reflected their  skepticism. Their aim was not to enthrone a different theory, but to urge the  CIA not to exclude any relevant information from what it provided to  policymakers. Only four top-level government officials received the briefing:  Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, and (together) Stephen Hadley and I. Lewis  &quot;Scooter&quot; Libby.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<table width=\"95%\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"10\" border=\"0\" align=\"center\">\n<tr>\n<td>\n<div align=\"justify\">Dear Doug,<\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">I guess you don&#8217;t read the papers. You don&#8217;t know that we&#8217;ve all seen your boss&#8217;s notes transcribed by Stephen Cambone from September 11th, 2001:<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"400\" height=\"201\" border=\"1\" src=\"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/images\/rumsfeldnote.jpg\" \/><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">In these notes, Rumsfeld is planning to &quot;<strong>Hit S<\/strong>addam <strong>H<\/strong>ussein <strong>at<\/strong> [the] <strong>same time<\/strong>, <strong>not only Osama Bin Laden<\/strong>.&quot; And he further assigns Paul Wolfowitz to find the connections between them. Paul Wolfowitz was your boss. So don&#8217;t tell us that, <font color=\"#993300\">&quot;In evaluating our policy toward Iraq after Sept. 11, 2001, my office realized  that CIA analysts were&#8230;&quot;<\/font> anything. You didn&#8217;t <u>realize<\/u> anything! You were tasked with finding an Al Qaeda Saddam Hussein connection! End of story.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">And, by the way, using new words doesn&#8217;t change <strong>Saddam Hussein<\/strong> and <strong>Osama Bin Laden <\/strong>one bit [<font color=\"#993300\">&quot;They excluded reports conflicting with their favored theory: that the <strong>secular Iraqi Baathist regime<\/strong> would not cooperate with <strong>al-Qaeda jihadists<\/strong>&quot;<\/font>]. And your sarcasm isn&#8217;t worth anything any more. It used to work &#8211; no more.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">And using <strong>they<\/strong> and <strong>their<\/strong> instead of <strong>me<\/strong> and <strong>my<\/strong> doesn&#8217;t work either, [<font color=\"#993300\">&quot;Pentagon officials did not buy that theory, and in 2002 <strong>they<\/strong> gave a briefing that reflected <strong>their<\/strong> skepticism. <strong>Their<\/strong> aim was not to enthrone a different theory, but to urge the CIA not to exclude any relevant information from what it provided to policymakers&quot;<\/font>]. This was <strong>your<\/strong> show. You know how we know? Because <strong>you<\/strong> leaked it all to <strong>The Weekly Standard<\/strong> and it&#8217;s published under <strong>your<\/strong> name as <a href=\"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/from-the-weekly-standard\/\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>Case Closed<\/strong><\/a> [read <a href=\"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/from-the-weekly-standard\/\" target=\"_blank\"><strong>here<\/strong><\/a>]. Ask <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/dir.salon.com\/story\/opinion\/feature\/2004\/03\/10\/osp_moveon\/index.html?pn=1\" target=\"_blank\">Karen Kwiatkowski<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">And as to the scope of your presentations [<font color=\"#993300\">&quot;Their aim was not to enthrone a different theory, but to urge the CIA not to exclude any relevant information from what it provided to policymakers.&quot;<\/font>] and [<font color=\"#993300\">&quot;Only four top-level government officials received the briefing: Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, and (together) Stephen Hadley and I. Lewis &quot;Scooter&quot; Libby.&quot;<\/font>]. If the scope was so limited, why have Bush and Cheney referenced it in every speech possible as intelligence for years, and why did you leak it to <strong>The Weekly Standard<\/strong>?<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Doug, you&#8217;ve been in a time-warp. Those kind of <strong>Talking Points<\/strong> don&#8217;t work any more. Back to the drawing board&#8230; <\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">Sincerely,<br \/>     1boringoldman<\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>P.S.: <\/strong>As of today 3128 American soldiers  and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens have died in Iraq. <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Douglas Feith made my day with Tough Questions We Were Right to Ask in the Washington Post. It&#8217;s like opening a time capsule on those days back in 2002 and 2003 when they were planning the invasion of Iraq. Even the title sounds like an early Bush sound-byte &#8211; &quot;Tough Questions.&quot; Then, it was, &quot;answering [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-933","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/933","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=933"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/933\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}