EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
World Bank Staff Seek Wolfowitz's Ouster
WASHINGTON - The World Bank's Staff Association, which represents 10,000 employees, asked Bank President Paul Wolfowitz to step down Thursday amid charges that he gave his girlfriend, a Bank employee, improper pay raises and attempted to cover it up.The association made the call during an informal press conference inside the Bank at which dozens of employees showed up, the first time anyone inside the Washington-headquartered institution has demanded his ouster.
The gathering became dramatic when Wolfowitz himself appeared uninvited and sought to defend his actions.
"The president must acknowledge that his conduct has compromised the integrity and effectiveness of the World Bank Group and has destroyed the staff's trust in his leadership," said a statement from the Staff Association signed by its chairwoman Alison Cave. "He must act honourably and resign."
The call came less than an hour after Wolfowitz issued his own statement. "I made a mistake, for which I am sorry," said the 64-year-old World Bank president.
The Staff Association said it decided to call for his resignation even though the Bank's Board, which runs the institution's day to day affairs, announced that it is prepared to officially investigate the allegations that Wolfowitz used his position to enrich Shaha Riza, a Bank employee with whom he had a personal relationship, through large pay hikes that violated Bank protocols.
The association said it feared that the Board may not act quickly enough, and called for the release of all relevant documents, including a memorandum from Wolfowitz to the human resources vice president instructing him to second Riza to the U.S. State Department on a generous package that brought her salary to 193,000 dollars a year -- 7,000 dollars more than that earned by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Wolfowitz defended himself on Thursday, saying that he had already sought the advice of the Ethics Committee at the Bank and that he acted "in good faith".
He also said he was trying to ward off a possible legal problem for the Bank. He did not elaborate on whether Riza had threatened to sue the Bank if she was involuntarily assigned to the State Department -- a necessary move since Bank employees who are personally involved may not work together.
"This was an involuntary reassignment and I believed there was a legal risk if this was not resolved by mutual agreement," he said. "I take full responsibility for the details."
But Wolfowitz's statement did not allay concerns among staff that he may have placed his girlfriend's interests before the institution's.
The Staff Association says, for example, that there was no representation by the Bank's legal counsel during negotiations of the new contract for Riza, although her own attorney was present.
Wolfowitz has taken several hits over the past week, the last of which came from Ad Melkert, former chairman of the ethics committee, who denied that the committee directed or agreed to Riza's contract terms, as the Bank president alleged.
The Staff Association also says that the former general counsel of the Bank, Roberto Danino, rejected the terms for Riza's reassignment, leading to his exclusion by Wolfowitz from the actual contract negotiations.
The association said the affair is taking a toll on morale inside the Bank. "It therefore seems impossible for the institution to move forward with any sense of purpose under the present leadership, especially in our endeavor to assist governments and their people in improving their own governance," it said.
The controversy has been particularly embarrassing for Wolfowitz and the Bank because since he came to office in 2005, Wolfowitz has sought to make an anti-corruption crusade the signature of his tenure.
Last year, he announced a "long-term strategy" for using the Bank's funds and expertise to help developing countries rid their governments of bribe-taking and other dishonest practices.
But even as he assumed responsibility for decisions related to Riza, Wolfowitz went on the offensive, implying that the staff's reaction may have been motivated by displeasure with his role in the Pentagon as a main architect of the U.S. invasion and later occupation or Iraq, now in its fifth year and exacting huge human and financial costs.
"For those people who disagree with the things that they associate me with in my previous job, I'm not in my previous job," Wolfowitz said in a statement. "I'm not working for the U.S. government; I'm working for this institution and its 185 shareholders."
Wolfowitz came to the World Bank in mid-2005 from his post as the U.S. deputy secretary of defence.
His appointment to the World Bank sent ripples through many at the institution and within development circles who feared that his neo-conservative credentials and close association with the carnage caused by the Iraq war could undermine the Bank's image as one of the world's leading development agencies.
But the controversy over Riza's salary increases has mostly skirted his role in the Iraq war -- with Wolfowitz himself bringing it up.
Copyright © 2007 IPS-Inter Press Service.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
26 Comments so far
Show All[Wolfowitz defended himself on Thursday, saying that he had already sought the advice of the Ethics Committee at the Bank and that he acted "in good faith".]
The Ethics Committee didn't say he acted in good faith, he just sought their advice.
Let's see, "The World Bank Ethics Committee" I'm sure they have ethical advice!
"The president must acknowledge that his conduct has compromised the integrity and effectiveness of the World Bank Group..."
I quit reading there.
Let's all cut the guy some slack-- he's been working so hard he doesn't even have time to darn his socks...
I hope some committee has the spine to fire the bastard!
As usual, facts are twisted by people such as Wolfowitz, a neo-con who cares nothing for morality, only his personal benefit and that of friends. This is pure Straussian philosophy.
The girlfriend is also whinng about being forced to move against her wishes. Well, I'm sorry, but if it's policy that two romantically involved employees can't work together, then she really had no choice - other than to resign.
And Wolfowitz says he spoke with the Ethics Depatment about the issue. Which he did. They told him his girlfreind should be moved but also compensated.
This is when Wolfowitz sent a memo to human resources basically demanding they give her the huge payraise and he set the terms for future pay raises.
It's nice to read about this evil person being booed by his employees and even a demonstration is being planned to rally for his resignation. The US has a lot of pull with the bank and it might not be so easy to wipe away the stain of Wolfowitz.
I hope the board of directors is brave enough not to cave in to pressure from the White House. In the meantime, it's nice to see this arrogant man get knocked around a little.
As the saying goes, "Real men die only once, cowards die everyday."
Another Bush scandal by another one of the good old boys foisted on us by the most corrupt administration in the history of our country.
I think Hybridomea and Linda have it right. This monster was "elected" to his current office by Shrub & company! The world at large didn't want him then and are just figuring out how to get him out of the World Bank. I don't support the World Bank, but with WolfaSHIT at it's head. it's even worse than normal.
I hope the Board gets a grip, and FIRES the A**hole!
A corrupt organization deserves a corrupt leader--but it does not deserve funding from the US Treasury or to use the State Department as a kind of farm club to park its "not quite ready for prime-time" prospects.
Why should Wolfowitz resign? We cannot break old tradition. Path to World Bank goes through war, preferably through the failed one. Wolfowitz simply follows McNamara's steps.
"Wolfowitz came to the World Bank in mid-2005 from his post as the U.S. deputy secretary of defence."
As I remember, it was more like he was shoved down their throats.
"His appointment to the World Bank sent ripples through many at the institution and within development circles who feared that his neo-conservative credentials and close association with the carnage caused by the Iraq war could undermine the Bank's image as one of the world's leading development agencies."
His appointment sent ripples down the spine of every rational thinking human on the planet.
Wolfowitz has blown everything he has touched, from the lies leading into the war in Iraq to many of the other failed policies of the Bush administration. Why would we expect this incompentent with no exceptional record to reap anything than corruption, damage and shame with the World Bank?
From what little I understand about the World Bank, I am not sure they are much better than Wolfowitz when it comes to development, whether it be third world countries or developing the salary of a girl friend.
Doesn't the World Bank get its tenacles around developing countries future by locking them into a system that basically enriches the the first world corporate interests?
They are kind of a "shadow government" run by the corporations . Let's face it, unregulated greed institutionalized as the modus operandi of human endeavor always leads to the crushing of "the good." It is a basic philosophy built on I, Me, and Mine, and erases and makes subservient the better aspects of humankind to greed.
....And the walls came tumbling down!
Is there nothing these Neoconers can do without violating the rules or going outside the bounds of the law? If not, then is it plain incompetence or a fundamental criminal guile inherent to conservatism that's behind it?
Maybe these neo-con guys/gals need a dictionary - "mistakes" are not generally intentional actions, that when discovered are intentionally covered up for one's own nefarious purposes. Let's just say it, out loud, all together, "They're all liars and have only their own interests at heart, certainly not yours or mine." I believe MichealPDA is correct, The World Bank is really a front for global corporations and money lenders who want to keep control of all emerging economies. On the face, the Bank appears to be very altruisitc, spreading money and compassion among the poor. But when the underbelly is inspected, we find it's infected with greed for money, power, control for elitists and the infection may soon be resistant to our medicine. Wolfowitz must go - and not to some cushy job back in the ol' USofA.
Wolfowitz is the embodiment of the wretched, pathologically lying, sartorial misfits (a guy who licks his comb in public before doing his hair, allows himself to be photographed with holes in his socks...just imagine what his underwear looks like?)who populate the neocon underworld that for the past 7 years has been rammed down our throats like ipecac, waiting for all of us to vomit them out onto the curb. Vomit may stink and make a mess, but afterward, you always feel better. This miscreant ought to be vomited out of the World Bank's stomach ASAP. His moral crimes in Iraq and here at home---how many of the brain-damaged, amputated, permanently disfigured young soldiers struggling to recover at places like Walter Reed owe their wounds directly to this arrogant slug of a man, who told Congress back when with a straight face that the war would cost us next to nothing and be over in a few weeks---are of such crushing import to the sad history of this country's folly in the Middle East that firing is too good for him, as the cliche goes. He ought to be stripped naked, tarred and feathered and run down Pennsylvania Avenue on a rail, and then locked in a mold-infested motel room at Walter Reed until the commanding general there comes to visit him, which will be never. What a lovely end to his story that would be.
My goodness, such virulence in here. Yes, Wolfowitz is a scumbag, and his idea of a mistake is getting caught. And yes, the World Bank is a good fit for him, since it's there to loan money to poor countries and appear to address the issues of corruption and theft of public resources while crushing their social programs in order to repay the debt.
But our tax dollars are paying the salaries of thousands of people like him that this administration has turned over rocks to find. What's the size of the Federal beaurocracy these days? It bloats every time we have a Republican administration. And if you think the Wolfowitz story is evil, read up on Negroponte.
We've got work to do: IMPEACH. I'm not faulting Nancy Pelosi for holding back, the votes aren't there and she can't manufacture them out of thin air. But this administration is making it harder and harder for the Republicans to support it, so be patient and keep the pressure on. The closer the next election gets, the more they will be panicking. And the steady stream of bad news for this administration isn't going to stop. Nice for George he doesn't read the papers, but for his aides, every day must be a bad day. So keep letting your Senators and Representatives hear from you about impeachment. Pay attention to measures being debated and call them (I call the local offices - cheaper). They need to know they're being closely watched.
For me, it feels healthier not to participate in the negative energy surrounding Wolfowitz. It just draws in more negative energy.
kathyoday, you take a soft approach, but not one that is soft in the sense of not being tough. Just less rigid, which is good. I agree with you. If we push oversight and investigation with our representatives, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, then the call for impeachment will come. This administration and its cronies have thumbed their noses at the rule of law, and to not impeach would leave us on the slippery slope toward unitary powers.
It is important to keep the pressure on, as kahtyodat says, particularly because the talking heads of the Far Right will try to spin these investigations and say they are politcally motivated. We need to let those investigating no we have their backs and that there are thousands, hundreds of thousands, out here wanting some accounting for what has been done to our Constitution. Remind them that it is not only Congress' right to investigate, it is their constitutional duty. Otherwise, they will be come to be a ceremonmial figurehead without the power to uphold democracy and their constitutional role.
kathyodat April 14th, 2007 1:07 pm
"And if you think the Wolfowitz story is evil, read up on Negroponte."
You can start here: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1306
According to this profile, Negroponte was apparently "the only person acceptable to both Rice and [Vice President Dick] Cheney." This alone speaks volumes!
Creeping Jesus, I'm going to need to scrub my eyeballs after imagining Wolfowitz, torn socks and all, "on the job" with an actual human female of the species. What position does he favor? For the love of Pete, Riza, could it actually be worth it? On the other hand, for all its horrificity, it's the very first sign of actual humanity I've seen in any of these thugs in the past six years...
Cheer up marlow, he didn't exactly pick a winner. She's busily stabbing him in the back right now. They seem prtety well suited for each other.
Some of you guys are missing the point...
To be sure, Wolfie is a low-life, stench-producing, Straussian stool. However, in the scheme of things, he is a minor player... a low level lackey, a clerical functionary, so to speak...
Not unlike his accomplice, former Fed Chairman Alan "Flannel Mouth" Greenspan, he is but the current iteration of the international banking families' Step'n Fetchit… a self-important, arrogant torpedo, steered by his anonymous masters and launched at the commerce and commonwealth of all the nations of the world.
Neither of these cretins can be termed loyal Americans by any stretch of the imagination.
But occasionally, a low-level operative like Wolfowitz inadvertently lets the cat out of the bag and provides important information TO Americans (and other nationalities) who have eyes to see and ears to hear…
In his own words:
"For those people who disagree with the things that they associate me with in my previous job, I'm not in my previous job, I'm not working for the U.S. government; I'm working for this institution and its 185 shareholders."
THIS IS THE POINT…
In their respective banking positions and -it may be argued- throughout the entire destructive life of Wolfowitz, neither of these cronies "worked for" the well-being of the United States, or any other nation, or group of nations under heaven. By his own admission, Wolfowitz is (and Greenspan was) the institutional hiree of unseen, private, shareholding denizens (the owners of World Bank and the Fed), respectively… 185 international owners of the former, and a smaller number of private, Class 'A' stock-holders of the latter.
In 1913, the ignorance and apathy of American taxpayers, cupidity of national politicians and perfidy of Woodrow Wilson stole from the Congress… and vested in these nameless possessors of then-almost-unimaginable wealth… the biggest monopoly of all time, i.e., the statutory right to be the sole issuers of all United States credit and absolute controllers of the entire American monetary system. (Federal Reserve Act). Since that year, all depressions, inflations, wars and other insanities experienced by the citizens of the United States have been orchestrated by personages behind the scenes, for their own enrichment… operating through toadies like Greenspan and Wolfowitz.
Now, American Constitutional sovereignty having become a dead letter, the U.S. dollar debased to peso proportions (and about to lose its international reserve currency status) and the American nation politically, economically and morally bankrupt, Greenspan (soon to be followed by the Fed, itself) has bowed out, Wolfowitz and the World Bank are taking over, globally, and the bosses are using the shell of invincible U.S. military technology for their own end game purposes…
Their goal? Exploitation and ownership of the entire world's natural resources, to be tapped, mined, processed, manufactured and distributed in thralldom by their (former) rightful, national owners. "Globalism", pure and simple.
Opposing this mere handful of the super-rich (Wolfy's masters: 'this institution and its 185 shareholders')... whose power is all out of proportion to its numbers... is Islam, the only credible remaining force as yet occupying and possessing significant territorial and natural resources, as yet uncowed by the privately-owned, predatory, fractional-reserve, usury-based monetary system… and -to the bitter end- militantly determined not to be).
Proverbs 22:7 informs us: "The rich ruleth over the poor and the borrower is slave to the lender."
The United States is the world's biggest borrower and -against its own national interests- unquestionably the political slave of the money lenders..
Against this scenario, there are many who are 'outraged' because it is alleged that one of this money-lending predator's lackeys actually misused his office to enrich his bimbo ?
HaHaHaHaHa!
Wolfowitz's chutzpah is just one more insignificant –albeit inflamatory- deck chair on the global Titanic.
As I stated earlier, some are missing the point… not seeing the big picture.
Well put, Spirit of Ezra Pound. But if so, the Islamic countries can't stop quarreling among themselves long enough to protect their interests. My father said back in the 1950s that WWIII would begin in the Middle East.
I think Bush is a dangerous war criminal who needs to be impeached before he sets the world on fire.
As for the monetary system, do you have any suggestions??
One more thing. Your post gave me a strange sensation of having gone up into space and looked down on this planet and it wasn't a pretty sight. It made me feel very uneasy about our future.
I've wondered that perhaps the single greatest lesson that the fascists learned from Hitler was that the uniform, symbol, etc. made it too easy for its detractors to identify & personify. The shadowy natures of the World Bank, WTO, Federal Reserve, Rothschild family throughout history, slavery, diamond cartels, oil cartels, drug cartels, etc. has us going around in circles blaming abstract "systems" for injustices wrought by very real individuals. We need to start naming names.
Here in Minnesota, one of our richest is Carl Pohlad, who got rich foreclosing on farms in the Great Depression. More recently, his supporters have strong-armed the state legislature into tax-subsidizing a new stadium for the Twins. And right now Minneapolis and Hennepin County are seeing trendendous jumps in home foreclosures.
The ueber-wealthy are astounding.One of our other most wealthy, Stanley Hubbard, is hoping to build a 10,000 square foot home on the St. Croix riverbanks, which will be out of variance in several ways. I'm betting he gets his way.
It all leads me to Exhibit A. Namely, that laws are for those bound by laws.. They really don't apply in the ordinary sense to our kings, princes, and dukes.
Hi, kathyodat ... a person who actually read my rant! ... I 'll attempt to respond to your questions and observations.
Concerning the various factions within (and without) Islam today, resident in the countries currently targeted by the banksters, via Israeli and U.S. gun sights (e.g., Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan)... and hourly blared over our prostituted press and monopoly media to be the 'cause' of 'unity' problems over there... the major impediment to 'peace''... the very incubus of 'terrorism'... for consumption by 'boobus americanus'.
Suffice it to say that 92 years of U.S. and British bastardy in that region have contributed to the chaos and mutual distrust among the subject (victimized) tribal people, beginning with George V and his 1915 protocol agreement with Hussein (not to be confused with the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement, which has become the ONLY admitted (and AVAILABLE TO RESEARCHERS) 'agreement' between England and the Arabs... concerning post-WW1 apportionment of then-Turkish-controlled lands. Except for 3 surviving copies of stated 1915 Protocols -published by the U.S. Government Printing Office-, one of which I had in my possession, purchased at a Bucknell University Library sale and foolishly resold (unaware of its rarity, at the time), all vestiges of this protocol agreement have disappeared, notwithstanding that this PUBLISHED PROTOCOL, signed by the principals (George V and Hussein), and COMPLETE WITH MAPS, ceded most of the land area, then controlled by the Turks (including all of Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip) to Hussein and the Arabs... in exchange for their military participation with Great Britain and victory against the Turks, who were then allied with the banksters' "enemy d'jour" (the despicable Huns). Meanwhile, a secret document (attributed to Lord Balfour, but actually drafted by Louis Brandeis, a leading American Zionist and Supreme Court Justice, appointed by Woodrow Wilson (another story), made the diplomatic rounds and was signed by George V, in sub-rosa negation of the earlier protocol he had signed with Hussein (The sib-rosa document was later referred to as the "Balfour Declaration").
Anyhow, der Kaiser vas defeated... and at the Versailles 'Peace' Treaty, the Zionist Delegation, led by Bernard Baruch, unveiled, for the first time, this heretofore secret document... which ceded the conquered land area formerly occupied by the Turks... not to Hussein, but to the Zionists. Of course, this revelation was very disturbing to the Arabs and to Lawrence of Arabia (whom most boobs associate with Peter O'Toole), both of whom had been betrayed, following serious bloodshed in pursuit of equity for the Arabs... which equity (they had believed) was underwritten by the 1915 good-faith agreement between Hussein and George V.
The 1990 (or 1991) flick: "Dangerous Man", starring Ralph Fiennes, recalls these historic events, albeit in a very sanitized and politically-correct manner... including T. E. Lawrence's mysterious post-Versailles fatal motorcycle crash (some people know too much, especially an eyewitness, who became a postwar, internationally famous author).
One can add to this festering wound the events following WW2... creation of the UN (and its first official act: 1948 international recognition of the sovereign state of Israel), forced, brutal expatriation of Palestinians from their ancient homelands into compounds resembling WW2 concentration camps... Suez... the seven days war... infiltration of all Islamic/Arab countries by agents provocateur (banksters' janissaries), unconditional U.S. support of Israel, lying U.S. Presidents, Desert Storm, Iraqnam, the American war drums toward Iran and Syria. But you get my drift....
These are my assertions, based on many scholarly first-person accounts. I recommend that you read two titles by Stephen Bonsal (an eyewitness confidant of Woodrow Wilson), concerning Versailles:
"Unfinished Business" and "Suitors and Suppliants -The little Nations at Versailles"
Also, three titles by Douglas Reed (a WW1 Brit veteran, later Chief Eastern European Foreign Correspondent (Warsaw, Moscow, Prague, Athens, Sofia, Bucharest, and Budapest) for the Times, until WW2... then, author, playwright and novelist):
"From Smoke to Smother"
"A Prophet at Home"
"Disgrace Abounding"
Also, Reed's travelogue. describing social and political realities in the United States in 1951:
"Far and Wide - A further survey of the grand design of the twentieth century"
The monetary system which I would recommend as ideal and equitable for all people (one which assuredly will NOT be implemented anywhere on earth -with the possible exception of Venezuela, in a slightly modified form-, short of Kingdom Come), is 'Social Credit', an honest, usury-free, wealth-producing and peace-conducing monetary system. It ties the issuance of money directly to real production, whose value is determined by the market and whose issuance is a function of the state (and not a privately-owned bank). It was actually implemented on an experimental basis in the Canadian province of Alberta and was proving to be very successful (until abandoned by the politicians "in support of the war effort" at the outbreak of WW2 - and never reinstated).
The economist who developed Social Credit was C. O. Douglas. He authored many books. Two titles which you should read (if you're really serious about monetary systems and their impact on the harmony -or disharmony- of/among nations) are:
"The Monopoly of Credit"
"The Development of World Dominion"
If you want to buy any of these books, you'll find them on these recommended sites:
http://www.bookfinder.com
http://www.abebooks.com
http://www.alibris.com
So far as your own personal financial and physical survival in the chaos soon to be experienced in the United States...
Unless you're wealthy enough to buy a 98,000-acre hideaway in Paraguay (like "W" did)
http://kerchenko.newsvine.com/_news/2006/12/10/476490-george-w-bush-buys-98000-acres-in-paraguay
as a "bug-out" destination to retreat to, when the 'oatmeal' hits the fan here (which it most inevitably is going to do), I suggest that you stock up on two metals: Au and Pb.
Obtain physical possession of and secure storage for the former. And a reliable delivery system for the latter...