To the Editor:
In his book “500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars,” Kurt Eichenwald describes a conversation that supposedly took place some 10 years ago between the two of us concerning intelligence about Iraq and Al Qaeda. In reviewing the book (Oct. 7), Thomas E. Ricks says this alleged exchange “conveys the mind-set of the Bush administration.” But in fact, no such conversation took place.
Eichenwald provides no source — not even an anonymous one — for this report, nor even an approximate date. We are certain that we never had such a conversation, nor did we hold the views attributed to us, which would have been inconsistent with intelligence that was known during that time period, such as that reported in the director of central intelligence George Tenet’s Oct. 7, 2002, letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee or in the C.I.A.’s earlier report in June 2002, “Iraq and al-Qa’ida: Interpreting a Murky Relationship.” There was and remains much debate about the significance of the intelligence, but neither of us would have suggested that the intelligence “is just not there.”
STEPHEN J. HADLEY
PAUL D. WOLFOWITZ
Washington
What's new on AEI
![]() |
How to beat Memorial Day traffic forever |
![]() |
Bernanke stumbles, markets react |
![]() |
Don't edit the First Amendment |
![]() |
Home Economics |

Join the AEI Media List
-
27
MON -
28
TUE -
29
WED -
30
THU -
31
FRI
As the controversy over climate policy has grown, it has been said that greenhouse gas (GHG) control is too hard but solar radiation management (SRM) is too easy. Join AEI for a discussion of the potential economic benefits, as well as the risks of SRM with Lee Lane, J. Eric Bickel and Nobel Laureate Thomas Schelling. A reception will follow.
At this event, panelists will address pension reform challenges by presenting the results of three research papers commissioned by AEI through a generous grant from the Smith Richardson Foundation.
Mark Warshawsky, a well-known expert in retirement finance and a newly appointed commissioner, will explain the implications of a publicly funded long-term care insurance program. Then a panel will debate whether another government program the best way to ensure that families can afford to provide the necessary services for their aging loved ones.







