Ellington

The much bally-hooed Vanity Fair piece NeoCulpa is online. And, yup, it's just in time for the election.

According to Perle, who left the Defense Policy Board in 2004, this unfolding catastrophe has a central cause: devastating dysfunction within the administration of President George W. Bush. Perle says, "The decisions did not get made that should have been. They didn't get made in a timely fashion, and the differences were argued out endlessly.… At the end of the day, you have to hold the president responsible.… I don't think he realized the extent of the opposition within his own administration, and the disloyalty."

Perle goes so far as to say that, if he had his time over, he would not have advocated an invasion of Iraq: "I think if I had been delphic, and had seen where we are today, and people had said, 'Should we go into Iraq?,' I think now I probably would have said, 'No, let's consider other strategies for dealing with the thing that concerns us most, which is Saddam supplying weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.' … I don't say that because I no longer believe that Saddam had the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction, or that he was not in contact with terrorists. I believe those two premises were both correct. Could we have managed that threat by means other than a direct military intervention? Well, maybe we could have."

How far can they back away from quotes like this?

Kenneth Adelman: "The most dispiriting and awful moment of the whole administration was the day that Bush gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom to [former C.I.A. director] George Tenet, General Tommy Franks, and [Coalition Provisional Authority chief] Jerry [Paul] Bremer—three of the most incompetent people who've ever served in such key spots. And they get the highest civilian honor a president can bestow on anyone! That was the day I checked out of this administration. It was then I thought, There's no seriousness here, these are not serious people. If he had been serious, the president would have realized that those three are each directly responsible for the disaster of Iraq."

Gulp...I agree with a neo-con!

Previous Comments

ID

108352

Comment

It would not be the first time that a whistleblower made a deal with a publication to go public, then pretend they are shocked and awed by the timing or the "context." It would also be highly unusual for a reputable publication to promise anything about timing to a source. It's not up to the source—especially not public figures such as these who have been involved in international policy-setting. Regardless, I'm not feeling sorry for them one iota. It's not like they are everyday citizens who know nothing about how to deal with media. They wanted the publicity (and the distance), and they got it. If I were the Bushies, though, I would be ticked off that some of my biggest advisers on how much "shock and awe" made sense were turning on me, though.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-11-06T15:00:18-06:00

ID

108353

Comment

From the piece itself we're told that this is an excerpt of the full story to come in the "January" issue (on the streets in early December). No doubt Vanity Fair thought that making this a two-parter would move some magazines...and I wouldn't be surprised if the neo-cons thought they were in the clear because the piece was schedule for the issue after the election. Probably the most interesting undercurrent in these quotes is who they blame -- the women. (Bum bum buuuum!) In particular, Condi, but look at this kinda jaw-flapping: Michael Ledeen, American Enterprise Institute freedom scholar: "Ask yourself who the most powerful people in the White House are. They are women who are in love with the president: Laura [Bush], Condi, Harriet Miers, and Karen Hughes." You can almost smell the cognac that he dipped his cigar into when he uttered that quote. :-)

Author

Todd Stauffer

Date

2006-11-06T15:12:07-06:00

ID

108354

Comment

Todd, ickk!!! Did ya have to bring that up? Face it, some of the "advisors" around Bush do not want to go down McNamara style in history. Call it, public relations for historical purposes. Should keep academics and book writers busy 30 years from now. Presidents are judged by history, not in the here and now. The Iraq war will surely go down as one of Bush's greatest failures. However, history teaches that he who wins, dictates history (long term). Let the spin begin!

Author

Doc Rogers

Date

2006-11-06T22:27:34-06:00

ID

108355

Comment

Yeah, that's some neo-con ick. I'm going to be honest with you and say that anyone I've ever met who calls themselves a "neocon" tends to be narcissistic, slimy drunks who cheat on their wives and think they're a whole lot smarter than they come across. Just sayin'. (Being that they want to get personal and all. Ha.)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2006-11-06T22:38:26-06:00

ID

108356

Comment

Vanity Fair also reported that Clinton was offered Osama by Sudan and turned the offer down. Hope you consider them to be just as credible on that story as well.

Author

Kingfish

Date

2006-11-06T23:32:45-06:00