Michael Santomauro
Attack of the Wolfman
Fri Jun 25, 2004 04:38
64.140.159.45

Attack of the Wolfman
By MAUREEN DOWD
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/24/opinion/24DOWD.html

Published: NYT June 24, 2004

WASHINGTON
CUT//Tuesday, Mr. Wolfowitz, Rummy's top deputy, told the House Armed
Services Committee that one reason so many negative stories come out of Iraq is that
"a lot of the press are afraid to travel very much, so they sit in Baghdad and
they publish rumors — and rumors are plentiful."

Beyond sliming journalists (much as he slimes his hair with his own saliva in
Michael Moore's new movie) who are risking their lives traveling around Iraq
to cover the cakewalk that became chaos, Mr. Wolfowitz dodges the
responsibility he bears for turning Iraq into a shooting gallery and Al Qaeda recruitment
center.

When challenged by Democratic lawmakers about the lack of a connection
between Saddam and Sept. 11, Mr. Wolfowitz was unrepentant — and unmoved by the 9/11
panel's conclusion that Saddam and Al Qaeda had no collaborative relationship.

"I don't need proof of involvement in Sept. 11 to be concerned that Saddam
Hussein is providing mutual support to Al Qaeda," he said. "It seems to me it's
like saying if someone breeds Rottweilers and leaves the gate open but doesn't
tell the dog who to attack, that he's not operationally involved in the
thing." (What's he talking about, and why are we still paying him?)

Perhaps that's not the most felicitous metaphor, given the revelations that
it was Donald Rumsfeld who O.K.'d the use of vicious dogs by U.S. guards to
threaten Iraqi prisoners.

The White House refuses to admit that, as far as U.S. security was concerned,
Saddam was more bark than bite. As Hans Blix put it, Saddam had put up a
"Beware of Dog" sign, so he didn't bother with the dog.

But instead of admitting he got the Saddam threat wrong, Mr. Wolfowitz
lectured Americans not to be impatient. Referring to our foes, he said, "The more
they sense that we're impatient . . . the more car bombs there will be." He
seems to imply that we're complicit in killing our soldiers if we don't sanguinely
go along with the Bush administration's delusions.

"The notion that this was `a war of choice,' that we could sit there and live
with the Middle East status quo after Sept. 11, I think is wrong," he said.

Once again, Mr. Wolfowitz conflates 9/11 and Iraq. Instead of finishing off
Osama in Afghanistan, the neocons dragged us into an Iraq adventure, which has
ended up destabilizing the Middle East. So much for the "status quo."

At least Colin Powell has the decency to be embarrassed about the State
Department's preposterous initial understatement of terror incidents.

Wolfie's never embarrassed, even as he continues to spin his version of the
truth about why we went to Iraq, how we're doing there and when we'll be able
to leave. The man is quite a talented propagandist — Michael Moore without the
laughs.
==========

ICHEE.org footnote:

Wolfowitz is one of the cabal - many of them former Trotskyites - critized by
General Zinni (May 21, 2004)

"Well, it starts with at the top. If you're the secretary of defense and
you're responsible for that. If you're responsible for that planning and that
execution on the ground. If you've assumed responsibility for the other elements,
non-military, non-security, political, economic, social and everything else,
then you bear responsibility," says Zinni. "Certainly those in your ranks that
foisted this strategy on us that is flawed. Certainly they ought to be gone
and replaced."

Zinni is talking about a group of policymakers within the administration
known as "the neo-conservatives" who saw the invasion of Iraq as a way to
stabilize American interests in the region and strengthen the position of Israel. They
include Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz; Undersecretary of Defense
Douglas Feith; Former Defense Policy Board member Richard Perle; National
Security Council member Eliot Abrams; and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff,
Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Zinni believes they are political ideologues who have hijacked American
policy in Iraq.

"I think it's the worst kept secret in Washington. That everybody - everybody
I talk to in Washington has known and fully knows what their agenda was and
what they were trying to do," says Zinni.

"And one article, because I mentioned the neo-conservatives who describe
themselves as neo-conservatives, I was called anti-Semitic. I mean, you know,
unbelievable that that's the kind of personal attacks that are run when you
criticize a strategy and those who propose it. I certainly didn't criticize who they
were. I certainly don't know what their ethnic religious backgrounds are. And
I'm not interested."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace is patriotic!
Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
253 West 72nd street #1711
New York, NY 10023
http://www.RePortersNoteBook.com
Available for Talk-Radio interviews 24hours 212-787-7891