[Winstonm]

Quote

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -        World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz refused on Wednesday to bow to heavy European pressure to resign as he sought to clear his name in negotiations with the bank's board over a possible exit strategy.

"Mr. Wolfowitz will not resign under this cloud and he will rather put this matter to a full (board) vote than to capitulate on his integrity," his lawyer Robert Bennett told Reuters.

Quote

WASHINGTON - With newly released internal e-mails and memos contradicting official statements on the sacking of eight U.S. attorneys, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales yesterday took responsibility for what he acknowledged were mistakes but rejected growing calls for him to resign.

Any opinions?

[mike777]

1) Many news reports say he did nothing, nothing unethical. All this girl friend stuff was approved and everyone knew it. News reports say he is trying to clean up the bank and this is payback.

[Winstonm]

mike777, on May 17 2007, 12:39 AM, said:

1) Many news reports say he did nothing, nothing unethical. All this girl friend stuff was approved and everyone knew it. News reports say he is trying to clean up the bank and this is payback.

Have to admit I have seen any stories like that. Sources?

[Al_U_Card]

People in postions of authority understand that, as far as conflict of interest is concerned, the appearance of conflict is just as important as an actual conflict. Loss of confidence in the ability to lead fairly is the problem. Leaders that tolerate such a situation either don't care or believe that they are beyond being taken to task for their impropriety or seeming impropriety.

Wolfowitz should have told his girlfriend "Sorry dear, you must go work elsewhere. I can give you a nice reference, if you wish....." but humans do what they want to as long as they think that they can get away with it. (Unless they are sociopathic.)

Typical of the power wielders and their inflated sense of knowing better than.....

[Winstonm]

Al_U_Card, on May 17 2007, 06:46 AM, said:

People in postions of authority understand that, as far as conflict of interest is concerned, the appearance of conflict is just as important as an actual conflict.  Loss of confidence in the ability to lead fairly is the problem.  Leaders that tolerate such a situation either don't care or believe that they are beyond being taken to task for their impropriety or seeming impropriety.

Wolfowitz should have told his girlfriend "Sorry dear, you must go work elsewhere. I can give you a nice reference, if you wish....."  but humans do what they want to as long as they think that they can get away with it. (Unless they are sociopathic.)

Typical of the power wielders and their inflated sense of knowing better than.....

Mike seems to suggest that Wolfowitz has been the focus of a conspiracy due to his honesty and desire to correct the bank's flaws. This would make him a victim.
I don't know Mike's source of reports, but to me it sounds a lot like Fox and their oft used "some say" method of reporting.

[hrothgar]

Winstonm, on May 17 2007, 01:31 PM, said:

mike777, on May 17 2007, 12:39 AM, said:

1) Many news reports say he did nothing, nothing unethical. All this girl friend stuff was approved and everyone knew it.  News reports say he is trying to clean up the bank and this is payback.

Have to admit I have seen any stories like that. Sources?

You have to remember that Mike lives in his own little world which seems to largely be shaped by Fox News. This inevitably leads to conflict with those of us in the "reality based community"...

From my perspective, there are a number of different points that need to be considered here:

1. The AdHoc committee of the World Bank clearly believes that Wolfowitz violated bank rules and procedures. The complete report can be read at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/NEWS/Re...eadhocgroup.pdf

The report brings levels three main charges against Wolfowitz

First: Wolfowitz illegally inserted himself into the negotiation process with his girlfriend

Second: Wolfowitz authorized an excessive compensation package for his girlfriend. Wolfowitz was specifically told that the compensation package violated World Bank policy

Third: After Wolfowitz went forward with the compensation package, he instructed his subordinate that he was not allowed to bring the compensation package to the attention of the Bank's General Counsel of the Bank's Legal Department

2. Wolfowitz claims that his troubles are based on his desire to pursue a reform based agenda at the World Bank. I certainly agree that some reform efforts are necessary. This doesn't mean that Wolfowitz is the right person to lead the Bank. Wolfowitz has little or no managerial experience. The Bushies considered using him to lead the Iraq Reconstruction Effort, however, they rejected him because he was widely considered to be a weak manager. Since joining the World Bank, Wolfowitz's signature moves have been to bring in a small team of cronies and trying to force the World Bank to support some rather dubious projects.

3. The crisis at the World Bank is yet another example of how the Bush administration has destroyed America's relationship with its traditional allies. This report was drafted by countries like England, Japan, Germany, and the like. The have told the US that Wolfowitz must resign. If he doesn't, the World Bank is going to fire his sorry ass and look outside the US for the next President. This is completely unheard of...

[Winstonm]

Richard:

I have a question for you. I have read that the World Bank has considered selling off a large lot of its gold reserve; however, my understanding is that the gold reserves are not truly owened by the World Bank but were deposited by the countries that helped found the bank.

Any thoughts on this?

[hrothgar]

Winstonm, on May 17 2007, 04:07 PM, said:

Richard:

I have a question for you. I have read that the World Bank has considered selling off a large lot of its gold reserve; however, my understanding is that the gold reserves are not truly owened by the World Bank but were deposited by the countries that helped found the bank.

Any thoughts on this?

No clue...

I'm not sure why the World Bank would be maintaining large gold reserves. The World Bank (more formally, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) was established to combat poverty and promote economic development. The bank requires money to operate, but there's no particular reason that it needs to be gold.

Honestly, this sounds a lot more like the International Monetary Fund. The IMF focuses on currency stabilization. I know that in the past, the IMF maintained some large gold reserves...

[hrothgar]

On the Gonzales front, Glen Greenwald says it all far better than I could

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?la...loggingheadstv/

[keylime]

Gonzales needs to go; even as a conservative screwing something as basic as what has happened is prima facie reasoning for a removal.

Wolfowitz to me deserves to stay only because of the fact that in the World Bank and other global entities, there is a certain internal mechanism of helping others that are family relations and similar that has been ongoing for years. That, and he has done a solid job in reducing corruption.

[Al_U_Card]

Btw,. does FOX stand for Fear Outrage Xenophobia?

[Al_U_Card]

keylime, on May 17 2007, 10:01 AM, said:

Gonzales needs to go; even as a conservative screwing something as basic as what has happened is prima facie reasoning for a removal.

Wolfowitz to me deserves to stay only because of the fact that in the World Bank and other global entities, there is a certain internal mechanism of helping others that are family relations and similar that has been ongoing for years. That, and he has done a solid job in reducing corruption.

This appears to be more of the blatant "get rid of the competent and replace them with cronies" approach to government.

Incompetence breeds obedience which leads to the road paved with good intentions. Handbaskets, anyone?

[jtfanclub]

Wow, that was actually fascinating, Hrothgar.

I had no idea that she believed that she'd been denied a promotion for 5 years (because she's a Muslim or the world hates her), and the raise she got was as if she'd been promoted 5 years previously (to the midlevel of the new level, not the starting point).

Funny how they don't mention that on Fox.

[mike777]

I have no great faith in Wolfowitz or the World Bank. It has poured 100's of billions down a rat hole over the years to thugs, dictators and mass murders. For decades it seems to give just the opposite advice many third world countries really need.
If the World Bank disappeared tomorrow along with most NGO's the world would be better off.

To be fair if you pour all that money into the world at least some good has been done.

Winston, you believe in so many conspiracies not sure why you would want to buy into an internal ethics report done by the Bank itself. Wow what a shock. Wolfowitz himself has labled the report biased, slanted and leaving out many things. I leave it to you to investigate what is the real truth. Wolfowitz goes on to say even the minor violations (by the very low world bank ethics levels) are not worth being fired over.

I agree in the private sector all this girlfriend stuff stinks. But by the World Bank's standards he was not unethical. This is merely a smear attempt and a successful one as he will be gone in a matter of days if not sooner.


Winston, just look at executive director of the World Bank Tom Scholor. There are 24 directors, this one is from the UK. Of course the WB is nothing more than a dumping ground of favors to put in one's political cronies.

Scholar also has a girl friend at the bank. Unlike Wolfowitz he never disclosed this relationship with a female employee even though it clearly interferes with his oversight responsibilities as a board member.

Scholar plays ball and keeps his job, Wolfowitz makes waves and loses his. Are Japan, UK and everyone else calling for Wolfowitz scalp, calling for clean ethics or something else? You can source it and decide on your own.

[Al_U_Card]

Political appointees have to deal with politics, it comes with the territory. He cannot cry foul when the "rules" are applied to him.

[jtfanclub]

Quote

I agree in the private sector all this girlfriend stuff stinks. But by the World Bank's standards he was not unethical. This is merely a smear attempt and a successful one as he will be gone in a matter of days if not sooner.

I don't buy that for a minute. Minimum level for her promotion was $129,000. Her previous pay was $133,000. Explain to me how she ethically got a promotion AND a $47,000 pay increase.

Looks to me like Wolfowitz agreed with his girlfriend that she got a raw deal from the Board in being denied a promotion earlier, and he pushed it through. Which not only was unethical, but also pissed the hell out of the board, since it basically overrode their earlier decisions.

Looks unethical to me. Got a link or anything else that explains how this was ethical?

[mike777]

"Got a link or anything else that explains how this was ethical? "

Wolfowitz tried to recuse himself, only to be could he could not! He would Have to give her the raise and the new Job! April 16th wsj. Geez do I need to keep all my documents to source everything for you guys..silly.

Now if you have reporting saying that is a lie, ok.....

It was reported Herman Wijffels decided to ignore evidence to justify their one-sided conclusions.

If you disagree with this reporting fine...I did not do it.



You guys expect someone to source everything they say here from some internet source? Who gets their news from all the idiotic internet sources. geez.......or carry around a list of reading sources. I read a zillion papers and magazines...source it yourself. For starters try reading, wall street journal from Monday or last week or the week before. Try reading the World bank documents yourself if you need a source. Try April 16 th WSJ. Memos of August 2005 for Xavier Coll, Memo of August 22 2005.

Could there be other memo/s or sources, sure, but no one is bothering to find out.

Even reading the report that is linkedhere, which I doubt the directors did in full sounds like a Kangaroo Court. Anyway read the other reports and decide yourself.

I notice no one responded to why it is ok for the UK executive director to have an undisclosed girlfriend who he supervises is ok, but Wolfowitz it is a firing offense. I guess since undisclosed we have no idea if anything unethical or not happened.

[jtfanclub]

Quote

For starters try reading, wall street journal from Monday or last week or the week before.

Yeah! Because God knows, THEY'RE an unbiased source.

I don't have a horse in this race. I found the article Hrothgar linked to fascinating, because it not only explained what Wolfowitz did, and why it was unethical, but why the board had turned on Wolfowitz. If you don't want to provide evidence or a reason why the $50K pay increase in addition to a promotion was ethical, that's fine. But I don't see any reason to listen to you rant, then.

[mike777]

ok if you think the wsj is a biased source and the wb documents I quoted, what can i say. You base your judgements on what you want to. I did provide evidence and I did produce a rational discussion, geez no wonder if you do not know evidence when I quote it to you, what can I say.

As I said do you your own reporting if you wish, but I hate to besmirch a man's reputation on one or two souces, esp this one sided ethics report. That is the bottom line, if you want to ruin this man's reputation based on your sources, fine. That is your judgement.

[Winstonm]

Mike, I don't expect anyone to source opinions, but when a statement is made to validate that opinion it is nice to at least say "according to xyz," then that source could be found.

Only an unthinking person does not believe there are many conspiracies that occur, as all it takes for a conspiracy is two people to agree to violate the law.
If two robbers agree to hold up a gas station, that by definition is a conspiracy. State and Federal statutes are similar. For convenience, here is the Federal code:

Quote

CONSPIRACY - 18 U.S.C. 371 makes it a separate Federal crime or offense for anyone to conspire or agree with someone else to do something which, if actually carried out, would amount to another Federal crime or offense.

Inside information about upgrades given to a hedge fund who then takes advantage of the news - conspiracy.

Two business partners agree to hire illegals and not pay withholding tax - conspiracy.

The government's claims about what happened on 9-11 - conspircacy.

I have never claimed any other conspiracy - I have only stated that important questions raise doubt whether or not the government's conspiracy theory is accurate and thus we need to re-investigate.

As to your question, it would not be OK for the UK director to arrange a huge pay raise against Bank rules for his girlfriend; whether he is allowed to directly supervise her is determined by bank policy - I think it's a lousy idea to allow it, as you cannot help but be influenced as her boss, and it cannot help but cause some amount of dissention with other workers.