The World Bank Issue

Clarice Feldman is on top of it at AmericanThinker, which, as you can tell by its name, is not a liberal blog. : )

Monday Shaha Riza and Paul Wolfowitz made their clearest most detailed and powerful statements to the World Bank. I was fortunate enough to be able to obtain in pdf format copies of their statements to share with American Thinker readers.

Comments

[ET]

Oh oh. Details and complexity. Dan, you are going to melt our liberal commenters' feeble minds with this. They can't grasp anything beyond..."Look! There's a Bush appointee! Let's get 'em!!" (picture mob with torches and pitchforks)

[Phoenix]

Wow. Lots of names, lots of dates, lots of proof..... lots of everything to exonerate these two. The 'gender' issue alone is a killer for the bank.... so is the blatant duplicity that indicates Wolfowitz and Ms. Riza were set up to take down as they were treated differently than others in the bank's hierarchy. The WB hasn't a leg to stand on! Oh, and that a Muslim Arab woman is one of their victims doesn't make it hard... no. She laid out her case with the foundation of a serious lawsuit in mind. Wolfowitz didn't as he was more defensive in his explanations, but I don't think there is any chance the Ethics Committee guys are missing his message. I hope the two of them clean WB's clock.

[Zifnab]

"Monday Shaha Riza and Paul Wolfowitz made their clearest most detailed and powerful statements to the World Bank."

Was that the one where he catagorically stated "I did not have sex with that woman"? Wait, maybe I'm thinking of another President. Oh well.

[nowinger]

Wolfowitz is gone, game over. He apparently wants to be publicly "exonerated" and then will step down voluntarily. Whether or not the rest of the countries that make up the world bank are willing to let him save face, remains to be seen. As usual, total insanity reigns supreme in the winger world, like the idea of Wolfie and his gal pal suing the world bank. Wolfie doens't want any close inspection of how he and his cadre have tried to censor and change world bank policies regarding family planning and global climate change.

Back in the day, when leaders lost the confidence of their troops/employees/shareholders they stepped down gracefully. The Bush Doctrine is to fight as long and hard as you can, mindless of any long term damage you are doing to the institution.

[Phoenix]

Oh horseshit. The WB doesn't like that Wolfowitz is holding everyone accountable for their debts. They figure if they can get rid of him, all the countries that owe us TONS of money can write that debt off. The World Bank is rife with corruption, and Wolfowitz has been cleaning house. They don't like it, they don't like being held accountable, and in the end, money talks. So they make up this vile non-scandal to get rid of him, but surprise..... Wolfowitz and Riza will not go gently into that good night. They've exposed the "Ethics" Committee as having none.

Look beneath the surface and get past your 'neocon' hatred, and this story will go down as one of the worst railroading jobs in the bank's history.

Oh, and Nowinger - DO tell us what long-term damage Wolfowitz was planning for the WB. Go for it since you know so much.

[Phoenix]

"...He apparently wants to be publicly "exonerated"..."

And while you're at it, do a nice philosophical and psychological exegesis on why a man might want to be exonerated when he committed no crime.

"...apparently..." You dumb shit.

[nowinger]

Wolfie allegedly put up significant roadblocks in any investigations of corruption in Iraq and Afganistan, he also allegedly used WB loans as rewards and punishments to countries that did or did not support Bush's war on terror and Iraq war, his subordinates allegedly attempted to change language of WB documents to omit contraceptives from family planning services and water down references to climate change.

Wolfie came in, ignored the WB staff and precedents, installed his loyal Bushies and set about alienating everyone in sight. It should come as NO surprise to anyone that when he made a misstep they pounced on him. This is what happens when you appoint people to run institutions that they are philosophically hostile to.

This is going to go down as the end of America's free ride in running the World Bank. Another stunning example of how Bush stupidity and arrogance has hurt the power of this country in the long term.

PS, A member of the ethics committe has said straight up that Wolfowitz LIED when he said they approved the salary. Gee, why am I not surprised?

[nowinger]

The point was that Wolfowitz knows he is going to lose his job. He will agree to resign if they say he committed no violations. Tit for Tat. Otherwise, he will force them into a vote of no confidence or they will have to remove him.

[Phoenix]

When you can write all of that without using the word 'allegedly', I'll read your predjudiced crap.

"PS, A member of the ethics committe has said straight up that Wolfowitz LIED when he said they approved the salary. Gee, why am I not surprised?"

YA THINK ??? What'd you expect the guy to do....say, "Ooops. We lied."

Wolfowitz putting in "Bushies". BULLSHIT. Get your facts straight you hate-filled automaton.

[nowinger]

It's all public record, who he brought in to run things and how he alienated the WB VPs by bringing in a bunch of Bush loyalists with no experience to work at the WB.

Wolfie has a long history of being wrong on the details, why should I believe him over the WB's ethics committee? Who is really more likely lying to cover his butt?

My facts are straight, but as is typical of you wingers, you don't want to know any facts. All you want to do is hear whatever Bush's mouthpiece says and then take it on face value. When he later admits he misspoke or misremembered or can't remember you will believe that too.

[ET]

Nowings is a typical partisan liberal, holding on desperately to his talking points despite being confronted with hard evidence that contradicts them. Nothing new here.

[Phoenix]

"...but as is typical of you wingers, you don't want to know any facts."

Prove this statement with facts. Start off with a clear definition of 'wingers'. Then get into the 'facts' of how all wingers are typical of not wanting to know facts.

"All you want to do is hear whatever Bush's mouthpiece says and then take it on face value. "

Prove this statement, as well, as soon as you tell us which 'Bush mouthpiece' you're talking about. Be sure to note which one has talked about the Wolfowitz WB debacle. Use some quotations, please.

And while we're at it, bitch, tell ME I'm a winger. Don't forget to tell me what criteria you used to label me. Make it valid or I'll eat your lunch as calling you on your stupidity has now become my mission. I'm sick to death of assholes.