Jon Stewart Interviews Douglas Feith

Have you ever wanted someone to ask Douglas Feith real questions. You remember, Feith, the Undersecretary of Defense under Rumsfeld and architect of the Iraq War invasion? The man who wrote a bang-up PowerPoint linking al-Qaeda with Saddam Hussein? The man who Tommy Franks called "the stupidest f***ing guy on the earth?"

Well, someone interviewed Feith and actually asked probing, legitimate questions. There were even some follow up questions to boot! Of course, it wasn't a real journalist. It was Jon Stewart. And it is definitely worth a watch:

[WATCH THE UNCUT VERSION]

Comments

[econdr]

This is such BS. Feith is a scumbag.

Jon Stewart is allowing him to rewrite history. Not once in the interview did Jon Stewart bring up the false Saddam - al qaida connection that was one of the main premises for going to war.

Don't let these neocons rewrite history...­.

[Krikkit]

Feith is dispicable. Read James Bamford's "A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies" if you want to know his role. Here's a quote from pg. 261-162:

"The blueprint for the new Bush policy [of preemption] had actually been drawn up five years earlier by three of his top national security advisors. Soon to be appointed to senior administration positions, they were Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser. Ironically, the plan was originally intended not for Bush bur for another world leader, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.­..

"A key part of the plan was to get the United States to pull out of peace negotiations and simply let Israel take care of the Palestinians as it saw fit... But the centerpiece of their recommendations was the removal of Saddam Hussein as the first step in remaking the Middle East into a region friendly, instead of hostile, to Israel..."

Regarding the above: Perle actually hand carried this plan to Israel and presented it to Netanyahu, but Netanyahu considered it too risky and refused the advice. Too bad Bush wasn't so savvy. You can still find the document written by Perle and published at the think tank website for Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies.

[trollsbwild]

Feith is shameless. His ideology was responsible for thousands of our soldiers dying, allegedly hundreds of thousands of Iraq civilians being killed, ttrillionsof dollars being misspent, and the destruction fo our miltary. So what do you do after you made a collassal F up? Go out and shill for a book to try to make a few bucks, while spewing forth more lies?
Stewart deserves an award for restraint. The man would have had the living s*it kicked out of him if he was near me.

[totalliberal]

I watched the show. It was the first time I heard absolutely no applause from the audience. Very telling. I also loved that Stewart said his book was almost unreadable.

[argeec]

I'm still waiting for Jon Stewart to ask one of these neocons about their Israel connections. It is obvious that the Iraq invasion was all about Israel and yet the media won't discuss it.
I guess even a comedy news show dare not cross that line. Same with all the Iran and Syria BS.

[Krikkit]

The pro-Israel lobby is very strong. Because it is such a beleagered state, American Jews who do not agree with Israeli policy keep quiet and keep forking over the cash anyway. When you consider that the Jewish population in the United states is several times that of Jews living in Israel, it doesn't take rocket science to figure out the dynamics, even if it doesn't seem to make sense on the face of things.

And face it, without American support, Israel WOULD be wiped off the face of the map in a heartbeat, despite their superior military equipment and training. As one of the few democratic societies in the region, our strategic military goals do not allow us to abandon Israel as a bad bet, even without considering the pro-Israel lobby and despite the fact that some of their policies toward Palestinians are attrocious.

[argeec]

Israel could have peace and security anytime they agree to the Arab League proposal or something similar. The neocons don't want peace, they want "Greater Israel".
Israel is a liability for the US- militarily, politically, economically and morally.

[RumiSouth]

Okay, that's two questions Jon "should have asked."

[knosiswar]

John, you missed the follow up. DF said that they were reacting to the intelligence that was pointing to Iraq as a potential threat. That was the rub, where were they getting their intelligence and who was feeding them the story line, ANSWER - DICK CHENEY.

27 year veteran analyst Ray McGovern testified at the hearing in 2005 held by John Conyers (with Joe Wilson and Cindy Shehan) to Dick Cheney's presence at CIA HQ's several times a week to go over the 'Intelligence'. He described it as unprecedented in his career. It's clear who manufactured the war with Iraq, Dick Cheney and his flunky Don Rumsfeld.

[knosiswar]

Read about it.

http://www.counterpunch.org/mcgovern06272003.html

[knosiswar]

READ

http://www.counterpunch.org/mcgovern06272003.html
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/110905Y.shtml
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2005/07/19/cheney_and_plame.php
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00155.htm
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/04/10/blowing_cheneys_cover.php
http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=9988

[RumiSouth]

That's number three...ho­w long of an "interview" do you think The Daily Show can sustain in 30 minutes?

[jeffp26]

Thank god for Jon Stewart. He is far more honest, and far more knowledgeable, than most of the other journalists on cable right now.

In fact, I think some of those who try to be fair and balanced, are so stupid, like Andrea Mitchell for instance, that they cannot. Shameful given the prominence of the first amendment of our constitution.

[ElkoJohn]

excellent & mostly serious interview by Jon
on a very serious matter
i wanted to scream at the Bushophile
Jon was very calm & intelligent

[Susanfrom29]

Considering his time constraints, and the absolute need for a civil discussion, I thought Jon Stewart did a remarkable jobs asking the questions that no one in the MSM ever bothers to ask.

Makes me wonder if perhaps one of the reason that the MSM treats us like children is that we have all too often behaved as such. Think about it. There are still people who swear that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks. Or that Barack Obama is a Muslim. Or that voted for George Bush in 2004 even after four years of his administration.

[BADEN]

My first question was...WHY?

My second question was...WHO BOOKED HIM?

My third question was..."Joh­n, why didn't you ask him "WHY?" over and over and over again.

Ban these beasts from public discourse and funds.

[smilodon1]

"A moment when the president wanted to focus on diplomacy.­.."? Feith must be on some great drugs. but they're probably illegal, anyway.

[Nyk]

Yeah, that comment struck me too. I think my comment to my dh was something like, "Bush wouldn't know diplomacy if it bit him on the ass."

[undeadbydawn]

Can we please stop referring to Jon Stewart as 'not a real journalist'?

Given that he regularly asks questions MSN wouldn't dare go near, he's easily one of the best journalists out there. The assumption that he is not to be taken seriously is not only offensive but downright dangerous.

I ask: if Jon Stewart isn't the real deal, who the hell is?

[nibblybits]

Sorry, I saw that interview and Jon really missed a valuable opportunity to ask some good questions. He danced around what he wanted to get at for fear of upsetting his guest. As a result, nothing came out of that 10 minute interview. A longer version is available on the Comedy Central website, but Jon really missed his chance.

Not his best interview.

[totalliberal]

It's not a court of law or the BillO (rude to your guests) report.

[wndrwrthg]

Given the stammering replies and the pauses, I would say that it was a very telling interview.

[SanityNowPlease]

john stewart ROCKS

[cuchulain]

Jon Stewart does a much better job than your average MSM interviewer. And it's obviously not his job to be far more thorough than they are. Though he was. But he still missed a coupla easy openings. I wish he had brought up the administration's psyops program that enlisted retired generals to spew warmongering garbage on the MSM . . . under the cover of supposedly "independent" analyses. It would have been the perfect moment for the NYT story.

The other aspect I wish he had brought up: The insanity of thinking that Hussein would ever attack America. The insanity of fearing that attack. The idiocy of fearing that he would ever attack the lone super power in the world. It's akin to believing that minnows are a threat to sharks. It's like believing that a mouse is a threat to a tiger, and so on.

Hussein was never, ever, ever going to attack us. He didn't have the means. He didn't have the death wish. He didn't even have an air force, and we controlled his air space anyway. America was vastly superior to Hussein at his most powerful--which was before Gulf War I--and we crushed him in short order then. In 2003, he was a shadow of a shadow of his former self. He was no threat to us. Ever.

It's truly one of the most baffling con-jobs in history. That anyone ever believed he was a threat to America.

[undeadbydawn]

and that is why fully 2% of the population of the United Kingdom [a huge number of people] marched the streets demanding their government did not follow this damned fool crusade.

We were ignored. The world now pays that price.

[cuchulain]

I just wish people would study history. Really really study it. For millennia, tribes, kingdoms, empires and nation-states have launched wars against inferior powers. For obvious reasons. There is no recorded incidence of a weak power launching an attack, a first strike, against any power significantly stronger. It's never happened. Hussein attacked Kuwait in 1990, a much much smaller, weaker nation. He didn't go after a country with a more powerful military than his own . . .

Dictators are especially given to playing the bully. They did it to get where they got in the first place, and they don't want to lose their power. They go after smaller fry, not greater powers. They want to expand their empire, not commit national suicide. Why did anyone think that Hussein would be different, when his history provided all the clues we needed? His history was to pick on weaker opponents. Can any sane person make the case that Hussein was stronger than America in 2003? Or Britain? Can any sane person make the case that he wasn't isolated and bottled up, as well as weaker?

Again, the whole thing is beyond baffling.

[Liberoservative]

The US put Sadaam Hussein in power to begin with.. why would he attack us? We were helping him

http://www.the-spark.net/o_saddam.html

Guess friends change....

[funnyguy]

Doug Feith is a total moron and John did a great job exposing him. Too bad so few "serious" journalists are as tough and smart as John.

[rbloom]

This interview should be required viewing in every newsroom and journalism class in America. With all the newspeople trying to become entertainers and trivializing the news these days, it falls to an entertainer who takes the news seriously to show everyone how journalism should be done.

[RobbieEagleFan]

I could not AGREE more. It drives me crazy to hear Russet and the rest unable to pin down or puncture the obvious nonsense these people put out - such as the Obama/Hamas thing - like the guy wasn't any sort of Hamas leader, or he was also talking about JFK, etc. I do think Wolf Blitzer is WORSE than Chris Wallace. Its like he is bored with hos own questions.

[Zogtastic]

The Daily Show is the greatest trap too...

"Oh, they won't hammer me, IT'S A COMEDY SHOW!"

WRONG!

Same goes for the Colbert Report, although I think many are becoming more aware of what they'll be in for on that show lol.