link is here, by Stephen Hayes, Aug 5 2008

article that disputes a lot of suskidns book

says forgery accusation seems inplausible Edit

"To believe Suskind's account, then, you would have to believe: 1) that the Bush administration ordered the CIA, in writing, to forge a letter that was a rather obvious hoax; 2) that the CIA, hostile to the Bush administration and leaking against it at every turn, eagerly complied. "

says the cheney nion link is implausible Edit

"It's hard to tell from this passage if Suskind understands that Cheney was a relatively low-level bureaucrat in the Office of Economic Opportunity and later the Cost of Living Council and, more important, that did not serve in the Nixon White House during Watergate. The experience taught Cheney much about economics, but there was nothing "searing" about his time in the White House that relates to Watergate since he was already gone by the time the break-in took place."

  • q: when did watergate break-in take place
  • q: when did elssbergs psychiatrist take place
  • q: what about the other tricks, when did they take place
  • q: when did the coverups of watergate take place
  • q: cheney was under rumsfeld? when rumsfeld switched jobs, what did cheney do? did he follow rumsfeld around or what?

says suskind uncredible Edit

quotes tenet and bill kristol and talks about probles with The One Percent Doctrine, another book by suskind

other points Edit

ive headache, too tired to go through the rest of the article and sum it up. why dont you? click 'edit this page', above.