This is a little holding tank for all the crckpot conspiracy theories about this issue to go without mucking up the main pages.
How do you know a crackpot theory from a good one? Crackpot theory has no evidence. Then again, you could say anything that relies on anonymous sources as 'evidence' is cackpot itself.
On the third hand, consider wikipedia:Mark Felt, who leaked Watergate information to Woodward and Bernstein. Now, he told them a lot of bad information, but on the other hnd, what good information he gave them, ws enough for them to break a hell of a lot of stories, eventually uncovering the nixon tapes, and then, resignation . . not to mention a whole bunch of laws restricting goernment power.
in other words, in every crackpot theory, there might remain a nugget of truth... and in every grand true theory, there can be crackpot elements to it, or people who like the true theory, and just happen to be crackpots.
On to the crackpots.
whole book is a plot against mccain Edit
lets say its all crap. even basic stuff, like that naji sabri met with bill murray through an intermediary, is just wrong. why come out with it?
well, the crackpots go, its trying to prompt a congressional inquiry. even if the congress finds nothing, it will make the republicans look bad, and damage mccains chances in the election in november.
suskind has said on an interview that his sources were looking to 'where we are going' or the end of the year, coded language! omg ponies!
suskind got shafted by mi6, cia, etc Edit
this theory would hold that many sources either lied to suskind or misled him , to cause him to print crap stories.
sub theory 1 Edit
this theory would hold that suskinds sources gave him abstract vague testimony, especially his 'off the record' sources. they knew that to be considered believable, he would have to 'dump tape'. dumping tape would mean that few if any sources would ever talk to him again, which woulld basically end his career. so he would have a choice: get this book trashed by deniers, or ruin his career by dumping tape.
furthermore someone would have to go through his tape before the dumping, removing all information about private people and other who might be damaged unfairly or defamed by the tape. this might be prohibitively expensive, and the sources knew it.
suskind didnt do his job Edit
this theory is that suskind got wrapped up in his own ego, his head getting wegded farther and farther up his own butt, till the only air he was breathing was his own farts. while dropping poetic language all over the book, and time traveling us back to 10th century bukhara, and inside bush's mind, he somewhere along the way forgot he was writing non-fitcion, nd should have done more research, and better research .
the thing you hate most, is you, theory Edit
some people say that the things that set you off the most, the biggest pet peeves, the stuff you rant about endlessly,,, is stuff you really hate about yourself. in this case, suskind apparently has a huge problem with:
- lack of empiricism
- lack of truthfulness
- ignoring evidence
- not admitting errors
- ignoring evidence that doesnt fit your theory
- not talking to your enemies
all of which he accuses Bush etc of having. but as pointed out on some websites, comments, bloggers, etc, suskinds book
- empiricism: sometimes has a lack of empiricism (ex: making statments without telling us how he knows this, using a ton of anonymous sources, essentially saying 'trust me, i have a pulitzer and used to work for the WSJ')
- not admitting errors: in interviews, he wont admit he might be wrong about some things. again, 'trust me', his sources are wonderful, according to him. just believe him!
- ignoring evidene that doesnt fit your theory: like the rob richer transcript, is so vague, it might not even be about a letter... suskind coudl have been more specific, but then it wouldnt have fit his theory about the letter.
- not talking to enemies: prime example is that he didnt talk to george tenet about the stuff in the book.
its all bureaucracy fighting within the government Edit
the DIA hates the CIA, which hates the FBI, they all hated OSP/feith, and everyones trying to blame each other for the WMD thing, curveball, niger/italian documents, etc. they tell suskind al sorts of shit to make their red tape enemies look bad, playing suskind like a fiddle.
suskind got screwed on purpose Edit
his sources dont mention the habbush letter until the end of his book process... knowing that he will add it at the end without taking time to check it carefully. they give him misleading vague info, then when he releases the book, they trash that letter story. this makes the entire rest of the book suspect, and dismissed by the public... for eample the naji sabri/murray story. nobody eer looks into it, thus, even the true things suskind uncovers are ... falling on deaf ears who dont believe him anymore.
suskind .. Edit
is part of the illuminati. etc etc etc. not even worth going into.
cheney/ rumsfeld were nixonite skullduggerers Edit
theory goes like this. rumsfeld gets hired by nixon in the late 60s/early 70s. rumsfeld hires cheney to help him. rumsfeld gets put on the EoE.
now, thats normal. the conspiracy:
rumsfeld was close with mitchell and chuck colson... who were the guys who hired howard hunt and others to help burglarize watergate and other semi legal/ un ethical tricks.
hunt once forged a letter.... and gave it to life magazine. it was a letter saing that jfk had tried to kill the leaders of south vietnam.. in a ploy to ignite hatred of kennedy amongst some catholic communities or something. hunt supposedly admits to this in a trial about this newspaper in florida.
chuck colson became a born again preacher, and in 2003ish, he ws part of the group of pastors who figured out how to justify the war, morally, philosophically. colson called the iraq war a just war.
anywyas the theory is that rumsfeld and cheney were around during watergate, saw what was going on... and they adopted a philosophy from it. the pihlosophy was not that nixon went too far, the philosophy ws that nixon didnt go far enough. this is sort of in suskidns book. cheney doesnt want the pres to know anything, plausible deniability.
the thoeyr also goes that , maybe rumsfeld/cheney were taking some plys from the old book of the 70s.
oh what a conspiracy.
nazi blowback Edit
several civvies behind the war had families who were killed in the holocaust
- doug feith
- paul wolfowitz
- Laurie Mylroie
fieths grandparents & uncles - killed by nazis in death camps
laurie mylroie - see the dedication of 'Bush vs the Beltway'
wolf - ?