WOLFOWITZ RESIGNS!
Thank God. Of all the bad decisions the Bush administration has made, naming Paul Wolfowitz President of the World Bank was one of the very worst. Wasn't there someone else out there who hadn't squandered hundreds of billions of American taxpayers' dollars by taking us into a war based on false rationales?
I can't believe that it has taken two years and a completely separate scandal to force this guy out. To those who say that this is really about Iraq, and not the scandal over his girlfriend, I would respond that Iraq is obviously going to be a major problem for Paul Wolfowitz for the rest of his career. Once you know someone has repeatedly lied about something as serious as which countries were involved in the 9/11 attacks, you're going to pay closer attention when his girlfriend gets a $47,000 raise from the organization he runs.
Nobody's perfect. But most of the rest of us haven't made any mistakes that have permanently damaged our Nation's standing in the world, cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians, and cost American taxpayers $400 billion - all without any clear benefit to American citizens, whatsoever.
Wolfowitz had a truly central role in the Bush administration's attempts to link Iraq to the 9/11 attacks, which began just hours after Al Qaeda hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, on September 17, 2001, Wolfowitz wrote a memo titled "Preventing More Events," which argued that "if there were even a 10 percent chance Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attack, maximum priority should be placed on eliminating that threat." (I have requested this memo under the Freedom Of Information Act; the Defense Department said that it could not be located).
As I noted in a prior post ("Hard to get a good case": Early Attempts to Link 9/11 and Iraq), "Wolfowitz’s '10 percent' logic has to be the single most absurd argument that was ever made for invading Iraq. Does that mean that if there is a 90% chance Al Qaeda did it, and a 10 percent chance Iraq did it, we should place 'maximum priority' on Iraq?"
Probably not - but that's exactly what Wolfowitz did. And that's some fuzzy math coming from a future President of the World Bank.
"Wolfowitz Resigns From World Bank" [Washington Post]
" 'Hard to get a good case': Early Attempts to Link 9/11 and Iraq" [outragedmoderates.org]
I can't believe that it has taken two years and a completely separate scandal to force this guy out. To those who say that this is really about Iraq, and not the scandal over his girlfriend, I would respond that Iraq is obviously going to be a major problem for Paul Wolfowitz for the rest of his career. Once you know someone has repeatedly lied about something as serious as which countries were involved in the 9/11 attacks, you're going to pay closer attention when his girlfriend gets a $47,000 raise from the organization he runs.
Nobody's perfect. But most of the rest of us haven't made any mistakes that have permanently damaged our Nation's standing in the world, cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians, and cost American taxpayers $400 billion - all without any clear benefit to American citizens, whatsoever.
Wolfowitz had a truly central role in the Bush administration's attempts to link Iraq to the 9/11 attacks, which began just hours after Al Qaeda hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, on September 17, 2001, Wolfowitz wrote a memo titled "Preventing More Events," which argued that "if there were even a 10 percent chance Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attack, maximum priority should be placed on eliminating that threat." (I have requested this memo under the Freedom Of Information Act; the Defense Department said that it could not be located).
As I noted in a prior post ("Hard to get a good case": Early Attempts to Link 9/11 and Iraq), "Wolfowitz’s '10 percent' logic has to be the single most absurd argument that was ever made for invading Iraq. Does that mean that if there is a 90% chance Al Qaeda did it, and a 10 percent chance Iraq did it, we should place 'maximum priority' on Iraq?"
Probably not - but that's exactly what Wolfowitz did. And that's some fuzzy math coming from a future President of the World Bank.
"Wolfowitz Resigns From World Bank" [Washington Post]
" 'Hard to get a good case': Early Attempts to Link 9/11 and Iraq" [outragedmoderates.org]
posted at 9:24:00 PM | permalink
<< Home