Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Letters To The Judge II
The letter from Paul Wolfowitz just goes on and on. Here is Wolfowitz telling the Judge that Libby will be proven correct by history when it comes to Iraq. Wolfowitz says of Libby that he was instrumental in developing strategy and policy for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq:
"On the latter I remember most of all - during the spring and summer of 2003, when some others were envisioning a prolonged American occupation, that he was a strong advocate for a more rapid build-up of the Iraqi Army and a more rapid transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis, points on which history will prove him to have been prescient."It appears that Wolfowitz is appealing to the Judge to consider Libby's ability to look into the future when sentencing him. Odd how Wolfowitz failed to mention that Libby got it exactly wrong as to whether or not Saddam had WMD. How did Libby stand on the wisdom of invading Iraq in the first place, and how will history judge that decision? Imagine the length of a list of all the wrong headed assumptions forwarded by Libby and the gang in stampeding this nation to needless war.
But Wolfowitz doensn't want us to remember Libby for any of that. Remember him because he wanted to build the Iraq army up after the invasion.
Here is Wolfowitz waxing eloquent on Libby's thought process in protecting the nation from biological attack:
[Libby asked] "what would we say to families who might lose loved ones in a future biological attack if we had not done everything possible to prevent it and to deal with its consequences. It was that sense of duty that led him to immerse himself in the details of the biological threat in a manner unlike any other public official I know."I would like to ask Wolfowitz, Libby, and all the others who drove this nation to war in Iraq. What do you say to the families who have lost loved ones in Iraq because you did everything possible to make this war happen and did not plan for the occupation. If Libby was supposed to be so expert in the field of biological weapons, how could he have gotten it so wrong on that particular issue when it came to Iraq?
Here is Wolfowitz deftly using reverse psychology on the Judge:
"I know of many examples of Mr. Libby's service to individuals, but let me mention two that are particularly relevant in the context of the present case. One involves his effort to persuade a newspaper not to publish information that would have endangered the life of a covert CIA agent working overseas"Oh no he did'n! Wolfowitz makes the case that protecting covert CIA agents is very very important and lives are at stake and so on. That is very true Wolfowitz, and precisely the reason that Plames outing and the subsequent cover up was so damaging! Is the judge supposed to somehow reason that Libby may have perjured himself and obstructed justice over the outing of one agent, but since he tried so hard to protect another agent, it's a wash. In fact I'll wager that Libby's defense of the previous agent would not have been quite so vigorous if that agents spouse had vocally opposed policies forwarded by Republicans. I suppose that agent is quite lucky really that they did not find themselves mixed up in a political tussle on the wrong side of Libby... because they most likely would be dead right now!
Frankly, I fail to see how a letter from a man who obviously has no ethical concerns of his own to worry about, which letter time and again reiterates the importance of the field in which Valerie Plame was employed, and demonstrates singular obtuseness in regards to the wrong headed policies forwarded by Libby and this administration is supposed to help Libby's cause. Reading this letter from Wolfowitz reminds me of exactly how much damage was done to this nation by Plames outing, and the disaster of the policy which led to that outing in the first place.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]