Posted on 05/17/2007 3:14:10 PM PDT by yoely
Just Breaking
This was a railroad job. Moral: Never piss off the corrupt, entrenched bureaucrats.
drodge! :o)
Just confirmed on Fox
A clockworks orange.
Brit Hume also confirmed this.
Hey, you got me... was in a rush...
That and don't keep your girlfriend in style on the company dime.
We have to start somewhere.
I thought he said he would not resign. Wuss.
43 should appoint John Bolton to replace him....
Moral: Behave morally.
He did behave morally.
Apparently many here are unfamiliar with the facts....
Wow ! Is this a bad news day, or what?
FWIW....
Excerpt Of The Day: The Wolfowitz Frame-Up At The World Bank
>>This was a railroad job. Moral: Never piss off the corrupt, entrenched bureaucrats.<<
There is another lesson. When your job is to root out corrupt entrenched bureaucrats, be extra careful to toe the line yourself because they will use any error in judgment against you.
This is political. But Wolfowitz still screwed up.
That said, he lasted longer than the President could have reasonably hoped for.
So what? He’ll wind up with another “provided for” position with a hedge fund, a bank, a private equity firm because all these b....... in government from every administration are all in it together.
The vote today is a clarion call. This isn’t going away. Wolfie was one of the architects of this Iraq debacle and he’s as insulated from the real world as every single politician and government official around the country in every party left and right.
If only the lefty diehards would awaken from their brainwashing, maybe we really could do something, but they are too busy reading Kos and DU to see what needs to be done.
did I read somewhere the fellow who will step into Wolfowitz’s place was the second in command under kofi annan when kofi was Sec. Gen of the un?
Okay, the lesson is, don’t be dumb enough to let yourself get framed by people you should be politically savvy enough to know are your enemies out to take you down. He should have recused himself from any and all decisions regarding his girlfriend and stuck with his recusal. He should not have suggested or signed off on anything having to do with her promotions, salary, raises or perks.
James Brown? He’s a moonbat socialist.
However it is still the USA (White House) who has the say who becomes Worldbank president. That’s the way Wolfie got in.
I doubt they will get in Brown.
Grab news by the horns?
I agree with you there. I’m all for the cleaner-than-Caesar’s-wife approach.
Thank you, I couldn’t remember.
Wolfy sure made it hard for me to support him being a Jew with a Muslim girlfriend. Verboten in my book.
Goodbye Wolfowitz. Thanks for embarrassing our country by allowing us to put our faith in you. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
I won’t label her muslim. She is Arab, but she is secular, fighting for women rights in the Muslim world and supporting democratic development. That’s contrary to anything Islam stands for.
Or be so arrogant as to think nobody will care if you rig the system to get a plumb job for a woman because she's your girlfriend.
“error in judgment”. I like that. I call what he did, sneering arrogance at the very least.
Did you ever bother with the facts?
He insisted on keeping out of questions regarding his girlfriend. The euro libs in the bank assured nothing would be wrong with it, if he signs her a pay raise (which she was entitled to anway). He trusted them. The trap snapped and the euro libs in the bank now can get rid of him.
If anything he was incredibly naive.
Obviously.
“That and don’t keep your girlfriend in style on the company dime.”
And, you think that such is not the case in many high-ranking positions at the World Bank - besides Wolfowitz - including with one of the directors sitting in judgement of him.
The cesspool of nepotism at the World Bank is such that any “ethical” complaint against Wolfowitz by anyone near his rank is the pot calling the kettle black, in spades.
You are highly uninformed about the real reasons they went after Wolfowitz and what a pack of hypocrites those that did so are.
“Apparently many here are unfamiliar with the facts....”
And those “facts” would be???
Hmm and she managed to get a security clearance as a foreign national that let her traipse around the Pentagon and State Dept. unescorted.
Pretty unprecedented for somebody not attached to an allied government who already possesses that clearance from home. She must have known somebody.
As Casey Stengle used to say, “You could look it up.”
“There is another lesson. When your job is to root out corrupt entrenched bureaucrats, be extra careful to toe the line yourself because they will use any error in judgment against you.”
And, when:
(a)You know your “girlfriend” must resign, in spite of how many levels below you she is(no direct role from him to her or vice-a-versa), and
(b)when you go to the head of your boards “ethics” committee and tell him that you should be recused from decisions either (i) seeking her resignation, or (ii)financial matters likely to result from that request; and
(c)that “ethics” officials says no, you should handle it and lays out the financial concerns that ought be considered in her favor in consideration of a request that she resign; and
(d)you proceed based on the “ethics” official’s recommendations, ask him to review what is to be considered in her regard, financially, which he does and to which he makes no formal objection (but later said he did not believe he was “approving” those considerations, only reviewing them);
then to what is it that you did not “toe the line”, and what was your specific “error in judgement”.
The only error he made was in not referring the entire matter to his board, when their member in charge of “ethics” did not accept his, Wolfowitrz, request to recuse himself; and he should have demanded that his board appoint someone to handle it and keep him out of it. In going to the member of his board to which questions of “ethics” were to be received, and in every other act he took, there is not a single rule or procedure of the World Bank that he violated.
“The vote today is a clarion call.”
A clarion call to what, pray tell???????
Thank you for taking the time to inform the ingnoramuses on this thread what the facts of this case are. Perhaps now they will stop spouting off in their ignorance. < /wishful thinking >
“Thanks for embarrassing our country by allowing us to put our faith in you.”
How ignorant about the facts of this case are you???
What his case revealed - to which the lefties in Europe should be, but are not “embarrased” - is the extent to which, the low depth to which, the height of hypocrisy to which they will go in a political attack on someone they do not like, particularly someone trying to push institutional reforms that get in the way of their political percs.
Oh no no, said the little Paul, to ask me is in vain
For who goes down your parlour hall can ne're come up again
The Euros turned him round about and went back in their den
For well they knew the trusting Paul would soon come back again
So they wove a subtle web, in a quiet corner small
And set their table ready to dine upon the Paul
Alas, alas, how very soon this naive little Paul
Hearing wily, soothing words, came flitting toward his fall
Up jumped the cunning Euros when he came buzzing past
They dragged him down the parlour hall and fiercely held him fast
They dragged him in behind a door, into their dismal den
Within their little parlour, and he ne're came out again
Moral of the tale......never underestimate hardball-playing Euro-Arachnids with the power to write unlimited checks and to spin sticky webs.
Leni
Both points are valid...but you have to admit that if it was World Bank President Bill Clinton he would,at worst,be mildly reprimanded rather than fired and the BBC wouldn't have uttered a single word about the matter...unlike the wall-to-wall coverage they've given it in recent days.
“Or be so arrogant as to think nobody will care if you rig the system to get a plumb job for a woman because she’s your girlfriend.”
You are totally ignorant on this case aren’t you.
He “rigged” nothing.
She was employed there before he went there.
When he went there everyone, including her, understood that she was going to be asked to resign, even though she was so many levels below his position that they would have no direct, or even indirect work relationship with each other at the bank.
He went to the head his board’s ethics committee, seeking his input on handling the matter and suggested to that official that he, Wolfowitz, be recused from any participation in the matter.
That official did not accept Wolfowitz recusal and said he, Wolfowitz, should personally deal with the matter and laid out some of the financial considerations that would be in line to be considered, in lieu of the request that she resign.
Wolfowitz then followed those recommendations in his discussions with the bank’s HR officials, reached an agreement with those officials, sought the ethics official’s review of those agreements and then let the appropriate departments carry them out. Nothing was done in secret and nothing was done to any violation of any World Bank rule or procedure. Nothing was offered her that was out of bounds of the kind of considerations that would be made by the bank when someone in her position was being asked to resign, due to no fault of her own.
The error Wolfowitz made was not being politically savy enough to realize that European members of his board, working through their member heading the “ethics” committee, were setting him up.
Nothing was “rigged”, except the attack the Europeans had set him up for - creating a “scandal” that wasn’t and then blaming the chief victim of their manufactured scandal.
“Hmm and she managed to get a security clearance as a foreign national that let her traipse around the Pentagon and State Dept. unescorted. ......Pretty unprecedented for somebody not attached to an allied government who already possesses that clearance from home. She must have known somebody.”
You are basically ignorant about the DOD and the State Department, where many people, with security clearances of many levels, high and low, work; where the location of “secure” work and/or the ability to access such work is strictly limited, not simply by security clearance but by the kind and level of work assigned and allowed to do.
Her position at the State Department is still a position paid by the World Bank, working with State Department people and programs that are either related to or coordinated with the economic development work shared by US programs and World Bank programs. She would never be in a location “unescorted” except where she is permitted to do the kind of work that she does; which does not require very great security and does not very great security access.
Just being in the building says nothing; if it did, then they’d have to shut both DOD and State Dept down, for all the lobbyists, lawyers and “officials”, foreign and domestic allowed in there with NO security clearance every day.
“As Casey Stengle used to say, “You could look it up.””
Then you should get looking because apparently you do not know what they are; you’re so able to state them - NOT.
This is pure political payback from the Euro-Socialists and their DemonRat buddies in the U.S. for Wolfowitz’s role in bringing down Saddam and disrupting Al-Qaeda.
I hope we will repay the payback by withdrawing from the IMF, the World Bank and the UN. Few things would make me happier than to see 1st Ave and 42nd Street turned into a US-military occupied installation and a long queue of anti-American “diplomat” s#!+heads expelled from the US.
Yeah, I know none of this will happen. But we’ve gotta have goals, right?
I’m not here to educate you.
Tony Blair will be the next nominee by the USA. He needs a job at the end of June when he steps down as Britain’s PM, to be replaced by Gordon Brown. Count on it.
By all means enlighten me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.