Wolfowitz Continues to Baffle the Imagination with his Disregard for Anything Ethical or, even, Intelligent

Wolfowitz - the architect of the Iraqi war; the author of the Platonic, Straussian, ‘ Noble Lie,’ designed to explain to the vulgar masses of the American public why war with Iraq was beneficial and necessary - has done it again. This time Wolfowitz, as the unqualified and certainly undeserving leader of the World Bank, was discovered of nepotism by giving his girlfriend an outrageously hyperbolic raise that made her salary exceed many of the professionals at the World Bank who are not only qualified to perform their jobs, but execute their responsibilities without committing persistent ethical infractions.

Wolfowitz has become for me a character of great interest - certainly not for his intellect or any quality that could remotely be interpreted as positive - but for his tragic character flaws that supersede the previously conceivable. A Greek Tragedy would refrain from constructing a tragic hero such as Wolfowitz because it would border upon the satirical and lack any realistic qualities leading to catharses, because his character would be so unbelievable that the audience would lose their trances of suspended disbelief, when viewing the performance of the play.

The hubris of Wolfowitz - the once esteemed neoconservative ideologue - is so abundant that it is surreal. This individual still thinks of himself in this Straussian defined elitist philosopher class of social identify, when he has demonstrated, time and time again, to be a resounding idiot; a baffling idiot who is largely responsible for one of the greatest disasters in American history; the war in Iraq.

Nevertheless, Wolfowitz persists in his arrogance as if he would be absent personality without it; an existential requisite which if negated by some remarkable realization by Wolfowitz that he is one of history’s great fools, if not the greatest, he would suffer from an the anxiety of standing over the cliff of oblivion, coming to the cognizance that if he was not inflated with pompous arrogance and vacuous foreign policy theory, he would be nothing at all.

With those rather kind and forgiving remarks upon our contemporary national court jester, I leave you with a republication of the following journalistic account of the follies of Wolfowitz by the Chron.com.

Russell Cole

Business news

April 13, 2007, 5:15PM
Wolfowitz’s friend says she’s the victim

By JEANNINE AVERSA AP Economics Writer
© 2007 The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — The woman at the heart of the controversy that has embroiled World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz says she is a victim and was forced into a job transfer because of their relationship.

Shaha Riza’s comments are included in new documents released by the World Bank on Friday that also show Wolfowitz had a direct hand in arranging her promotion and generous pay package. Wolfowitz is fighting to retain his job.

Riza said that at no time did she report directly to Wolfowitz and that he had proposed to recuse himself from any decisions involving her to avoid a potential conflict of interest.

She said the ethics committee of the World Bank’s board had required her “to go on external assignment contrary to my wishes.”

Riza was moved to a high-paying job at the State Department in September 2005. “I have now been victimized for agreeing to an arrangement that I have objected to and that I did not believe from the outset was in my best interest,” she said.

Her comments were made in a memo to an ad hoc committee of the World Bank looking into the circumstances surrounding her transfer.

Wolfowitz has said he made a mistake and has apologized for his role in Riza’s promotion. The White House expressed fresh support for Wolfowitz on Friday.

However, some of the bank’s staff have called for him to resign.

The World Bank’s board has been looking into the matter, which has overshadowed this weekend’s meetings of the 185-nation World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

A bank official said the board was not discussing the Wolfowitz matter on Friday but was focusing on the meetings. The bank’s mission is to fight poverty and improve living standards for the poor. It lends about $20 billion a year for various projects.

Before her transfer to the State Department, Riza worked as a communications adviser in the bank’s Middle East Department. In her memo, Riza said she did not want to be assigned to duties away from the bank and did not expect “any special considerations.”

She lamented “vicious public attacks” she said she has received over the matter. The episode, she said, has affected her “professionally, physically and psychologically.”

The packet of documents released by the World Bank included new details about Wolfowitz’s involvement in Riza’s job transfer.

Two months after arriving at the bank on June 1, 2005, Wolfowitz sent a memo to the bank’s vice president of human resources, laying out details concerning Riza’s employment and compensation.

“I now direct you to agree to a proposal which includes the following terms and conditions,” Wolfowitz instructed. “You should accept immediately her offer to be detailed to an outside institution of her choosing, while retaining bank salary and benefits.”

The Wolfowitz memo went on say that Riza should receive a promotion, draw a salary of $180,000 and get annual pay increases of 8 percent.

Before the job change, Riza was believed to be getting paid close to $133,000. After the transfer, she received $193,590, according to the Government Accountability Project, a watchdog group.

Riza remains on the World Bank’s payroll though she left the State Department job in 2006 and now works for Foundation for the Future, an international organization that gets some money from the department.

When asked what Riza does at the foundation, State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey on Friday said his “best understanding” was that she is an adviser to the foundation’s board. “I do not have a job description for her, no,” he said.

Riza’s pay package has led to accusations of favoritism from bank employees. The World Bank’s staff association wants Wolfowitz to resign. So does presidential hopeful John Edwards, the former senator from North Carolina who weighed in Friday.

“America’s ability to lead in the fight against global poverty is undermined with Paul Wolfowitz at the helm of the World Bank,” Edwards said. He said Wolfowitz’s tenure at the World Bank has been marked by some of the same “failures as his term managing the war in Iraq — cronyism and rhetoric that does not match reality — and now serious questions of financial integrity.”

President Bush appointed Wolfowitz — a main architect of the Iraq war when he served as deputy defense secretary — to the top job at the World Bank. The appointment was greeted with protests by international aid and other groups.

The United States — the bank’s largest shareholder — is standing by Wolfowitz during the current turmoil. “The president has confidence in Paul Wolfowitz and his work at the World Bank,” said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Joaquin Almunia, the European commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, didn’t speak directly about Wolfowitz’s ability to continue leading the bank, but suggested there is concern.

“It seems there has been a scandal. I don’t know what the consequences will be,” Almunia said. “I have been this morning with the European secretary directors of the World Bank and they have transmitted to me that it is a real concern.”

If you enjoyed this post,
Subscribe to the Free Midwest Populist Party Newsletter

Please consider a donation of $1 or more
to help keep this website active.