of course this doesn't get published until it looks like wolfo is leaving in 2004 (rumor of a couple days ago), but it's still nice to see.
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/3250/included is stuff like:
3. Even if NATO didn’t join the actual invasion of Iraq, they predicted that our reluctant allies would make up for their ‘mistake’ by sending peace keeping troops after the war. Wrong again. So we were implored to smash more wine bottles against the wall.
4. The neo-con priesthood decided that France, Germany and Belgium could easily be relocated to a new continent called ‘Old Europe’ and replaced by Rumania and Bulgaria as stalwart allies. This snub threatened America’s longest standing most durable strategic alliance. Now, with a partial return of sanity, we are all ‘Old Europeans’.
5. Immediately after the 9/11 attacks, Wolfowitz actively agitated for an immediate invasion of Iraq, not Afghanistan. Because, in his estimate, Iraq was ‘doable’. So far, the casualties in Iraq are ten times the casualties in Afghanistan. And the Iraqi venture is ten times more expensive. Besides, neither Iraq nor Afghanistan can be considered finished business. This was no ordinary ‘error in judgement’. It clearly revealed his hidden agenda to do Israel’s bidding. Instead of going after Al-Qaida training bases and the Taliban, Wolfowitz wanted to do his Likudnik chores for Sharon. Why wasn’t he fired on the spot for this bizarre display of dual allegiance at a time when America was shaken to the core by the assault on the WTC and the Pentagon?
no wonder he's going