The Bush practice of diversion has again DIVERGED from the reality of the case, only this time it's Paul Wolfowitz.
Evidently there are those that believe Wolfowitz is the man for all seasons in 'handling' the 'poor judgements' at The World Bank. There is even a defense based on the fact that he and his paramour were together before the appointment to the position of President of the World Bank. I believe that defense came from Bush himself. Imagine that. A Neocon President that covets Conservative Christians as his bastion of electorate security siding with a man that isn't married although sexually involved with a woman. Interesting.
There is a lot at stake for Paul Wolfowitz but little for anyone else. The World Bank has rules, by-laws and regulations to uphold and that has to come first. If Wolfowitz broke the rules that is all there is to it. If 'one strike' is all that is necessary and in a position with this much responsibility I would hope it is, then his leadership needs to be terminated.
The Neocons have played a very nasty game. They have masked themselves as a commodity of leadership that is unique and unmatched in their ability to carry out the ideals of their philosophy. That philosophy was supposed to include morals and ethics. As a rule they have lived up to none and if there is change needed at The World Bank then there are administrative processes to be convened. Anything short of same is simply taking priviledge where it should never go.
A stark example of Wolfowitz's 'wolf in sheep's clothing' can be noted in his perferred identity as a Neocon at all. It wasn't long ago when many people were struggling to understand the 'hard right' view of the world. They were called Neoconservatives (click here). They were supposed to be Pro-Israel deriving so much of their philosophy from Israel's aggressive defense of it's nation in the Middle East. It is amazing to realize how far afield the Neocons are from being Pro-Israel except to remain cheerleaders to 'the cause.' The last thing Israel needed was more and more instability in the Middle East and nations of Shia feeling threatened by 'the idea' of religious annihilation. The impacts that an illegal invasion into Iraq would cause to Israel was the furthest thing from the American Neocons minds when they entered that country against the advise of an American General that knew better.
Paul Wolfowitz is nothing but a fake. He has no right to conduct himself as a President of any kind yet alone the World Bank if he can't even follow the rules. I am not going to debate the aesthetics of the World Bank's processes and whether or not they are structured 'W'rongly to conduct effective business. That is not what is at question here. This is about ethics, the power of priviledge and whether or not it is condoned in this world.
Paul Wolfowitz is simply a sample of the corrupt nature of his breed. In a Republican Debate, as the candidates struggle to identify themselves differently than the others as the one candidate for president, there have been statements in regard to the Libby Case that simply astounded me. "Libby should be granted a pardon." "After all the underlying premise to any of the charges against him is that there are no laws broken." Never once did I hear "...he simply broke the law and perjured himself. He was the advisor to the Vice President. He should have known better on all aspects of this outrage in that it should never have happened. He has to pay the penalty for lying." It's amazing to hear the 'justification' of law breakers by other law breakers. I am still waiting to hear the words, "Cheney outed Plame for all the right reasons by god he should do it again !" Hasn't quite been said that way yet. Somehow, the impression had to be made by the Executive Branch to the CIA that they don't own up to the truth when the Neocons of the country are about to pull the stunt of the century.
It's time everyone without exception stand up to the policies of corruption. That is what priviledge is. If the USA can't find the political will to 'handle' the corruption of the Neocons than I would hope others would.
