who will be next World Bank President What will they do


Statement of Paul Wolfowitz Here is a copy of what Paul Wolfowitz said to the board of executive directors this afternoon in his opening statement.

After a quick read of the statement , I say, he had nothing new to offer. He - delusional as this sounds - seems to think that by voting him out the board will damage the bank more. Not much different from the argument that if US troops leave Iraq now - after they have destroyed it- Iraq will be - well how should I say this, destroyed !

A Washington source ~ May 16, 2007


I guess i hurt him bad with all that 'boyfriend' and 'girlfriend' talk i did. Gee sorry Pal.

Wolf should stop crying though, he's got new problems, the state department has launched into a new probe of his shaha role. '


i bet condi stops it.

anon ~ May 16, 2007, 02:50 AM

By the way, notice that when he says he'll change his management style, and separate his advisers from managers, he doesn't explicitly say he'll get rid of those idiots. Guy speaks with forked tongue.

As for his claims of nobody ever questioning his integrity, give me a break! This is a guy who had an affair with a woman behind his wife's back for at least two years, plus the chick at Johns Hopkins. when i was at the UN, the diplomats i knew constantly wondered about his ethics. Meanwhile, didn't the recent Rumsfeld book, by andrew cockburn, say he took something like $300,000 from some company like boeing for a little piece of weekend work? I think his integrity has found reason to be questioned time and time again, though I doubt he's noticed.

anon ~ May 16, 2007, 02:54 AM

Right. My two cents:

On the first page of the document, he says "Some people have disagreed with my policies and positions; but never before have they questioned my honesty or integrity." That statement alone should be enough to prove that this man has no grip on reality. Paul "Iraq will finance its own reconstruction" Wolfowitz? Honesty? Integrity? There's even footage of him in a hotel in Baghdad days after it had been bombed, saying that things are going swimmingly.

At the very end, there's a reference to "how this institution is seen in the U.S. and the World." This is a thinly veiled threat. Do what we say, or we will invoke the old Yankee individualistic spirit and pull out of the institution altogether. Gall he has. Integrity and honesty, he don't.

Sameer Dossani ~ May 16, 2007, 02:55 AM

In PW's statement there is nothing new. It is astonishing how thick his skin is (or he simply doesn't get it). He is making to the Board the same promise he made to the Vice Presidents three weeks ago, a promise which they turned down!

WB staff ~ May 16, 2007, 02:55 AM

Notice toward the end, when he worries the whole thing will ruin his life. That's probably what's really eating him. He derives his self-respect from the opinions of others so the idea of his life ruined amounts to his real concern. Notice that it's really all about him.

anon ~ May 16, 2007, 02:59 AM

Paul is truly delusional. He belongs to an asylum. And he is issuing threats: unless he gets to keep him job he will make sure the Bank is destroyed! How did this lunatic get to be where he is? Integrity? The fellow has no idea what it means. I hope the Board and the world to which he has appealed dare him and his patrons to do their worst. What the heck let them destroy the Bank, after all, it grinds for them.

Jacob Prichani ~ May 16, 2007, 03:11 AM

It's interesting that PW would say he should be judged on his performance at the Bank and not on what he did at the DOD. Now let's see, when the Bank hires someone, doesn't the security unit conduct a background investigation of the prospective staff member? If the person has some sort of "skeleton" in the closet, say a ethical breach like theft, a felony, fudging their CV, etc, then that would be grounds for not hiring. I guess when they looked at PW's background they must have missed the whole "war criminal" thingy. Hmm. I guess murder, state sanctioned torture, and breaking of national security protocol by hiring his girl friend without a security clearance, are ok then? So please, PW, just shut up and go quietly or if you don't want to go in shame, just fall on your sword.

nirk ~ May 16, 2007, 03:11 AM

I'm truly ashamed of Wolfie, young staff like me are just disgusted by his lack of dignity and integrity. I've always been amazed by the fact that all Bushies (not to be mistaken with "republicans" in general but more like those putting the cult of the persona above that of the GOP), refuse to face reality and seriously believe they are the righteous ones and therefore above any law. The case of Wolfie is even more mindboggling; he thinks is being persecuted but yet he thinks that a simple "sorry folks I made a mistake, let's keep rolling" would have been enough???? HELLO ?? SHOW ME ACCOUNTABILITY!!! Oh yes that's the word that doesn't exist in Bushies' dictionary. The pattern of complete disregard for rules, international laws, consensus is obvious across the Bush admin but this cannot be tolerated at the Bank. Wolfie "may" have had good intentions but his actions speak louder than his words and they are disgusting.
He needs to go if he has an ounce of dignity left in his body.

GRANDMECHANTLOUP ~ May 16, 2007, 03:14 AM

It's time to fire PW. He has-once again in this statement- shown poor judgement. Board, please, act. Let him in front of his responsibilities. May be under that pressure he will start to get it about Team B, Iraq, Management, Poverty, International Relations.

Fire PW ~ May 16, 2007, 03:15 AM

Had to agree with Pee Dub's opening statement though -- reading all the "boyfriend/girlfriend" talk in the media made me shudder too, although maybe not for the same reasons. "63 Y.O. NeoCon Uberhawk" should be enough to get him banned from e-Harmony for life... and who wants to imagine the rest? As for the gist of his statement, nothing new under the sun. If he manages to stay, to paraphrase REM, it's the end of the world (bank) as we know it -- but not in a good way.

WBstaff2 ~ May 16, 2007, 03:21 AM

Oh and I was forgetting! the fact that Wolfie was selected (imposed) as the WBG President demonstrates one thing: that you can build lies to go to war with a country, get thousands of innocent people killed, get cities destroyed, get billions spend on war and get a few already wealthy warmongers even wealthier... and STILL BECOME THE LEADER OF THE WORLD BANK!!!

It's time to bring back some decency in this institution, let's start by taking this murderer down.

GRANDMECHANTLOUP ~ May 16, 2007, 03:23 AM

Fire Riza too. She is a liability now. Her presence on the payroll is discouraging honest staff to believe in the Institution. She has worked at a DOD of a national Government (forbidden by WB rules). She has cheated using her connections with the President to get money and power (showing that what counts is being close to the boss, NOT merit). She was politically active while a WB employee - inciting staff to vote for Bush and actively working at the US State dept. well before going to Iraq for the DOD. She even made her staff work for the US State dept. (all of this is forbidden by WB rules). If the Board does not fire Riza, it will be impossible to ask WB employees not to work for DODs of national governments, not to be politically active, not to dedicate their well paid time to their own business. For the credibility of the institution and for the morale of the staff, Riza must be FIRED. This is serious.

Riza must go ~ May 16, 2007, 03:25 AM

Paul's statement about how nobody has ever questioned his integrity is 100% true: Nobody's ever believed he had any integrity to question. You got to hand it to this guy--he doesn't give up. Look at what he and a couple of other guys have accomplished--they've played a great part in bringing about the downfall of the United States, and I see plenty of veiled threats in that statement, that he plans or thinks he can bring down the bank. And maybe he can.

Thing is, guys like Paul work best when they're unrecognized for what they are, and therefore, unopposed. But Paul has now been exposed to daylight.

This is a great show, and I hope everybody is enjoying it.

CowDad ~ May 16, 2007, 03:31 AM

Well, with PW and Riza I suggest are fired Daboub, Palacio, INT boss, Cleveland, and all the cronies.

WB staff3 ~ May 16, 2007, 03:31 AM

Dear PW:

Having read your submission and your claim that you intend to reform your management style, I have a few nagging questions:

- It has now been weeks since this issue came up. You have previously said you intend to hire a coach to improve your style and undertake other reforms.

- What have you actually done during the interim weeks ?

- How can a dispassionate observer put any credence on your promise to reform when you made the same promise previously, and then didn't follow through?

- Why do you have to wait for the Board to act before you acted?

Why have you not made those staff changes before this evening?

Last I checked, you are still President, collecting your regular paycheck, and you have the authority to do so?

- Do you intend to terminate the employment of Robin Cleveland? Ana Palacio? Clean up INT?

- Do you have any plans to run open competitions for the above jobs?

- Do you recurse yourself from selection of the next head of INT given your documented record of lack of integrity, dishonesty, and wilful ignorance of actual and apparent conflict of interests.

- Do you intend to rescind the secondment of Shaha Riza, which you do not dispute is now widely recognized as contrary to bank rules? Why have you not done this already?

- Do you intend to reimburse the Bank for excess salary improperly granted to Shaha Riza? If you do not want to rescind that part of her contract, you can offer to pay it out of your own pay. Would you?

- Do you intend to rescind the portion of Shaha Riza's contract that is contrary to Bank rules, including but not limited to automatic raises, evaluation by a committee she has a veto on, and automatic promotions?

- Do you intend to permit Shaha Riza to return to the bank but in a capacity that do not result in a conflict of interest?

- Would you voluntarily return the portion of your salary that was negotiated in excess of the customary salary of the head of IMF retroactive to your first date of appointment.

- Do you have any plans to reimburse the Bank for the expenses incurred in this investigation?

- Do you have any ideas to improve governance?

- Do you plan to offer any apologies for taking this matter public with your attorney?

- Do you recant the accusations made by yourself or your attorney that questioned the fairness of the process or the integrity of the ad hoc Group?

- Do you intend to recant, withdraw, or otherwise rescind any statements you or your representatives made in public, or before the committee that have now been proven to be false, misleading, or otherwise not the whole truth?

- Do you sincerely apologize to the stakeholders and staff for your misconduct?

- Do you take full responsibility for what happened?

Why have you not done any or all of the above already?

It would seem that the above list is a rather obvious list that should have already been done before your appearance tonite.


Outside Observer

Nin ~ May 16, 2007, 03:36 AM

Yes fire them all. Fire all the cronies. But then we cannot stop. If the objective is to restore the credibility of the institution we cannot stop. We all know that the problems of the World Bank do not stop at the top. As already discussed in this blog, for example, HR promotions should be independently audited. Promotions should happen on merit. Unfortunately, at the moment that is impossible at the WB. I am a staff, unfortunately old enough to be senior, and I have been in quite a few selection panels and I can assure you that there is no competition: you go in to interview fully knowing who you should choose: the candidate the boss told you to chose. This is so disgusting - and unfortunately true - that I made clear I do not want to be in a panel anymore. I feel horrible after interviewing people that have no chance, and more than that i feel horrible seeing how my colleagues in the panel - as diligent soldiers - ask the difficult questions to the "wrong" candidates and applaud every answer of the "right" candidate, to get their bosses' satisfied smile.
My view is the following: while I favor Wolfowitz departure, I want him out because he has proven a weak leader - with no knowledge of the business, no strategically sense and no management skill- i.e. he is not up to the job (I want a … demotion on merit, again). I do not want him out because of the “scandal”; to be clear, the Riza affair disgusts and demoralizes me. But if we are frank with ourselves in the World Bank, we have to admit that Wolfowitz departure will not fix the “scandalous” behaviors. Everybody knows that in the Institution promotions happen NOT on merit; you get promoted if you faithfully serve the right boss, etc. I am dismayed and disgusted when I see that Country Directors – many of whom have practiced the same scandalous HR selection and promotion process a’ la Wolfowitz (I really would like to name names, but I have to be professional) – now scream in the name of ethics. The same applies to the list of Former WB Managers who wrote the letter to the FT. These guys have more WB blood on their hands than Worlfowitz. Bottom line, Wolfowitz has to go, he is not up to the job. But if we want to restore staff trust in the institution we need to severely reform the WB, be more transparent, starting from HR and promotion practices.

WB staff ~ May 16, 2007, 03:37 AM

What a disingenuous statement, especially from someone who needs a security staff to the tune of $5 million. The Bank could have used that money on a community driven project. PW should have offered to pay for his own security to free up those resources for the poor. Still cloaked in arrogance, his statement continued to cast the blame significantly more on the others. Then suddenly, he shamelessly called attention to his family. How does he live with himself when his track record includes marital transgression during his diplomatic stint in Indonesia under the very nose of his own family? And what about his original intent to get the Board to agree to a $1 million salary. He finally settled for less but got his security and his mistress paid out of Bank budget. This is the land of reinventing oneself -- surely PW's so-called intellect will guide him into the path of redemption out of the World Bank. One can only feel sympathy for his family.

Female Bank Staffer Ashamed for Riza ~ May 16, 2007, 04:17 AM

Here's what I would have asked him at today's Board meeting...

Mr. President:

A central theme of your line of defence in the question of conflict of interest is that you acted "in good faith."

At the same time you seem to have a perception that the Ethics Committee had a task in detecting--not only assessing but detecting--the presence of conflict of interest, which contradicts the Code of Conduct of Board Officials.

In this case, lack of compliance with a rule could be forgiven if due to ignorance of the rule or of its prevailing interpretation; that is, if its negligence has been in good faith.

Are we to assume that your preventing the General Counsel from being informed about key aspects of the contract can be explained as negligence in good faith?

M. Hulot ~ May 16, 2007, 04:38 AM

It is pretty obvious that PW and all his underqualified cronies are worried about standing in line at the local unemployment agency. One can only guess they will fight no matter what, even if it is undignified, embarrassing, and degrading to the Institution and the country they say they respect and believe in.

These people have no shame.

CleanUpNOW ~ May 16, 2007, 04:42 AM

There is no reason to do such a nasty thing as firing PW and Shaha.

Let's name him Country Director for Iraq and base him somewhere in Bagdad outside of the green zone.

Shaha, in the mean time, can continue her secondment in Beiruit at the offices of the Foundation for the Future.

Just think, they will be among so many friends and like minded arab democrats!!!!!

But you can't send high ranking people there without a staff, so lets send them with Palacio, Cleveland, etc.

After all, it is PW's express wish that the Bank has to be active in Iraq.

What better means to be sure it is done than to send the President there as the new Country Manager.

PS Can someone check that World Bank Travel policies do not permit taking rides on military transports?

Be sure PW gets only a one way pass in.

MakeWork ~ May 16, 2007, 04:50 AM

There are some reasons to agree with Mr. Wolfowitz that the Ethics Committee, the legal department and personnel gave him the impression that he was right to believe he was in charge.
He may have fallen into the old trap of hearing or reading only what confirmed his views or made his case. People who know PW aways comment on the thought process of the man: he arrives at a decision and use every fact and argument to confirm he is right. He does not listen and rejects any fact that will contradict his views. He also surrounds himself with sycophantic aides who tell him he is right.
In the "suck up to superiors-step on who is below" culture of the military and the IFIs, everyone defers to management, Presidents, Managing Directors, VicePresidents are made believe they are loved. No one challenges the formal authority, self preservation and advancement depends on that.

PW may have honestly believed that everything was fine, and everyone had agreed with him, and there were no issues to worry about. No one had the fortitude to challenge him and explain to him that there were problems and rules had been broken.
"There is none so blind as those who do not want to see", a sense of power and entitlement, hubris and arrogance made him blind. He pushed away and got rid of those who could have helped him and sorrounded himself with others who also could not see and said how wonderful he was.

There was no slave to remind the general: "Remember you are only human, you are also mortal."

Pity the man, let him leave with a little dignity.

He may be innocent of corruption in the case of the World Bank but he was unable to make a distinction he was already corrupted before he arrived to the Bank.

He was naive perhaps,

BeNice ToPaul ~ May 16, 2007, 05:01 AM

I am extremely sad that even after the finding of the SAd Hoc Group, PW has not changed hsi song, except to resort to begging and threatening. There is no way he can be effective. There are too many staff and too many clients who want him to go -- no matter what changes he might promise, no matter how far he might kick RC or even SR out. There is nothing he can do at this point except be rendered completely useless.

I love the way he takes credit for things like the Africa Action Plan, and how he plans to have more access and communication with the VPs. Hey pal you had your chance, and the only thing that I will give you credit for is approving of all hirings above H level (can you say micro manage), pushing some good people out espcially if they disagreed with Riza, disenfranchising many staff (we all have grievances for not getting promoted faster or higher raises), and having bad judgment by surroundaing yourself with your cronies. before you go it might be a good idea to kick them out before you go to show that you at least care about what happens to the rest of us next.

Sad and dismayed ~ May 16, 2007, 05:04 AM

Hi PW:

Reading your statement about the distress it caused you to be called 'boyfriend' and Shaha Riza 'girlfriend' made me feel as uncomfortable as Xavier Coll.

It is not my intent to call you by a name which might upset you, so I propose to henceforth replace the term with one that is more suitable and perhaps more accurate.

Just to be sure, I would like you to approve this first before it goes in my style guide.

How about if all of us are to refer to you as "John"? It is a very common name and it certainly sounds better than PW or Paul. You can simply be referred to as a "John".

In lieu of 'girlfriend', we can use the formal title of "Madam" for SR.

You two can be referred to as Madam and the John, instead of the term 'boyfriend and girlfriend' that you find fault with.

I trust that this new terminology will meet with your approval.

none ~ May 16, 2007, 05:09 AM

A reminder to the Bank's Board of Executive Directors:

The problem with dealing with crooks--such as PW--is that they never respond to decency. Without fail, they understand only in their own language. Just fire him with no explanation!

Washingtonian ~ May 16, 2007, 05:11 AM

Okay, Board, Narcissuswitz has had his day in court. We've heard it all before. Thanks to the excellent report of the Ethics Committee, he stands naked before the internet court of world opinion -- and what he has shown us is that he is totally unfit to head a septic tank service, let alone the World Bank.

Now, anyone in this situation with a shred of self-awareness would resign and then go into his office and "do the right thing" to show his acceptance of his shame. Fat-chance of that with The Architect.

Now he threatens to "do an Iraq" on the World Bank if he is not endorsed in his position. P-u-l-l-eeeze spare us the drama-queen routine....Rummy-boy has disappeaered of the face of the earth, Gonzo hangs by the thinnest of threads, Dubya is a lame duck with a 28 pct approval rating, rumor has it that Liz's Daddy's pacemaker is now past its pull-date....you have no plausible ability to do anything to the World Bank.

Just send Security up and escort this embarrassment from the building.

If he barricades himself in his office, then lock him in there, duct-tape all the openings, turn off all aircon and water, and ... throw away the key. With what the neocons won't call global warming, the Washington summer of '07 will be such that by about September, he should be ready to move to his new job as Chancellor of Liberty University -- I heard there's an opening as of today.

(I also saw a blog to the effect that the Likud Party is in the market for a new Israeli Defense Minister, that the Mossad is under pressure to hire more Arab women (outside the salary range), and that those Lebanese seem ripe for another cross-border artillery&armor massage to prepare them for democracy.....)

The Mahdi ~ May 16, 2007, 05:18 AM

The whole deal with Wolfowitz was in his hubris. He got some success early in life, when he played a key role in toppling the marcos regime in 86 and the whole thing went to his head. after that, he got a taste for toppling. he played a key role in toppling the suharto regime in 97 - that's nine years ago almost to this date - and then moved on to iraq in 03, a big dream of his. he's all about regime change except that he tended to create a lot of insurrection and corruption in its wake - it is what happens to anything when you destroy it and he really liked destroying. Now he came to the world bank, full of thoughts about toppling another 'corrupt' regime like all the others but what he didn't realize is, it wasn't interested in his smash-and-burn ideas about regime change, all of which left rubble, unrest and corruption in their wake - ask any Indonesian or Filipino or Iraqi if their countries are less corrupt after their dictators were toppled and the answer is sadly no - weren't selling at the world bank, where a cohesive culture did exist and there was no bubbling underbelly of youths to glom onto his regime change ideas and lead the charge from the barricades - as there was in Philippines and Indonesia. In short, Paul had no leadership talent because he had no eager young followers. He mistook the World Bank for just another Indonesia and Philippines and Iraq and found that he himself was the toppled dictator. I half wonder if some Indonesian dukun didn't put some curse on him given the curious timing of his exit to the legacy of the past.

anon ~ May 16, 2007, 05:37 AM

I have been following the Wolfie fiasco with great interest and was impressed by the clarity and logic of the Ad Hoc Committee's final report.

I have also read PW's statement to the Board of Directors--his plea of mitigation--and I think he make's some powerful arguments.

If this case had been tried in a criminal court, it is likely that PW would be given the benefit of doubt. From the outset, there's no doubt that PW, the Board, the Ethics Committee and Human resources were aware that PW's pre-existing relationship with Riza constituted a conflict of interest and that the matter required resolution, one way or the other. It is also apparent that PW wished to recluse himself, to take no part in determining the final outcome, yet the record shows that the Ethics Committee insisted that he take responsibility for the matter and to give "instructions" to have the matter resolved. It was thus that he instructed Coll to meet and negotiate a settled outcome with Riza.

I think PW exercised poor judgment in discussing the terms of the agreement with Coll. He was obviously compounding the conflict of interest but I believe that it is entirely plausible that PW was acting in good faith when Coll initiated that discussion.

It is also apparent that the Ethics Committee and Coll did not properly advise PW. The Ethics Committee should have more explicitly advised PW to recluse himself from the matter and to delegate responsibility to Coll to deal with it in a fair and equitable manner. Unfortunately such advice was not forthcoming. Coll on the other hand, should have had a better appreciation of the Bank's HR policies (which the Ad Hoc Committee subsequently unearthed) about the transfer, re-assignment and compensation of staff. He should also have negotiated the terms and explored a full range of options with Riza and her lawyer, but he merely took her proposal and presented it PW without negotiating, acting as a mere go-between. Coll should have also more explicitly voiced his concerns about the nature of the deal--in fact, he should have communicated these concerns in writing so that his position could be placed on record.

I am nevertheless troubled why PW did not involve General Counsel and why he instructed Coll not to seek advice from Counsel. I think the AHC's final report convincingly argued that Counsel's involvement would not have been a conflict of interest because all parties were presumably acting in the best interests of the institution.

Technically, I agree that PW did involve himself in a conflict of interest but I'm not convinced that he did so with bad intent, because on the facts, it is possible to believe that he was acting in good faith. On this basis, I contend that he should be given some benefit of doubt and that his "good faith" involvement in this conflict, by itself, should not be grounds for dismissal.

More importantly though, I believe PW exercised incredibly poor judgment, both in terms of involving himself in this conflict (whether or not it was in good faith) and in his subsequent handling of the affair. On this basis alone, I believe there are ample grounds to conclude that he has proved himself to be an incapable leader and that he should step down from his presidency.

Perhaps if the Board reaches a similar conclusion, i.e. “Mr. President, your involvement in the conflict of interest is by itself not sufficient grounds for dismissal, but your lack of leadership and your exercise of poor judgment are. We therefore invite you to tender your resignation in the best interests of the institution.” Would this not be a face saving way out for all?

It is apparent from PW’s written statement that he is most concerned about being sacked for breach of ethics since he states, “If you want to have a discussion about my leadership, my management style and the policies I support let’s do it. That’s fair …. But let’s get past this conflict of interest matter.”

There’s no doubt that PW is aware of his shortcomings in the leadership department, which is why he’s suggesting to restructure his front office and to more directly involve himself with his vice presidents. But this is too little too late and reaffirms the notion that he is incapable of leading the Bank.

So my thoughts are that while I agree that PW should go, I think he should be given some latitude on the conflict of interest charges and that he be forced to resign over his inability to lead the Bank. And in this regard, I concur with the views put forward by John Briscoe in his letter to his Brazil team colleagues.

Norman Gehringer ~ May 16, 2007, 05:38 AM

Wolfowitz always has his own interests at heart before anything. He does nothing from altruism. Anyone who knows him, including the board which noted the continuous pattern of self-dealing, knows that to be a fact. It''s what we have all experienced. It explains his cliquishness, his Plutus-like grab of benefits, his air rage at British Airways, his efforts to make it sweet for his cronies. He's always me-first. Wolf's pettiness and self-dealing is what got him into this situation in the first place. He's the most selfish guy I've ever met.

ANON ~ May 16, 2007, 05:42 AM

The WH strategy reminds me of the clown with the spinning plates in the circus, continuously giving each plate an extra spin. Bringing down one plate is a sign that they're all coming down.

It's time to send this clown and his Republican elephants back to the Circus World Museum in Baraboo!

At Witz End ~ May 16, 2007, 05:45 AM

The second report of the ad hoc group offers a unique insight into the mind of a neoconservative. The clues are all there; "turns logic on its head", "self interest" and so forth. There should be no surprise that Wolfowitz is unethical and irrational.

Wolfowitz is but one example of the neoconservative cancer on humanity that is typified by extremes of amoral behaviour, self-interest, the pursuit of power, fear, hatred, paranoia and delusional thinking. You cannot reason with these people any more than you can reason with some whacky religious cult. They have their own framework for thinking which has no relation to any reality understood by the rational and mentally healthy.

The Wolfowitz saga has been portrayed by some as the Europeans v America. It's really about integrity and humanity against corruption and abuse on behalf of US interests.

Peter Brown ~ May 16, 2007, 11:15 AM


Where is Robert J Bennett last nite?

Was he with Woofie as he made his plea?

Did Bennett resign? Did PW run out of allowance money to pay him?

This is real strange.... somebody who knows something please tell.

None ~ May 16, 2007, 01:49 PM


Where is Robert J Bennett last nite?

Was he with Woofie as he made his plea?

Did Bennett resign? Did PW run out of allowance money to pay him?

This is real strange.... somebody who knows something please tell.

None ~ May 16, 2007, 01:49 PM

" I am aware of the concern that I need to place more trust in the staff. .........I truly believe that I can do much better in that regard going forward, provided I make a number of other changes"Page # 14 , 2nd bullet.

Yes we trust you on that Mr Wolfowitz .
Like the Team B Strategic Objectives Panel, aimed to bury the politics of détente and the SALT arms negotiations, which were supported by the leadership of both political parties- a classic case of threat escalation by hawks determined to increase military budgets and step up the U.S. offensive in the cold war in 1975-76
Donald Rumsfeld and his E-Ring crew at the Pentagon(Rumsfeld Intelligence Agency) in 2002, an intelligence unit in [Undersecretary of Defense Douglas] Feith's office.
Remember your words to the Times: there is "a phenomenon in intelligence work that people who are pursuing a certain hypothesis will see certain facts that others won't, and not see other facts that others will."
Yep you did find the facts to make your case.

If you do continue at the helm of the WB, your B team (the political appointees from across the Potomac /Penn Avenue or the "talented" has-been politicans from countries who are WITH US (sic) and with whom you have good CHEMISTRY -whatever your definition) will make sure that the goals of the administration you are accountable to ( your real bosses instead of the DONORS) will be achieved.

Yul ~ May 16, 2007, 02:53 PM

PW was US ambassador in Indonesia for 7 years and NOT ONCE has mentioned the word "corruption" in ANY of his speeches despite being in the middle of one of the worse and more corrupted dictatorship ever. Then I was the architect of the invasion of Iraq, the biggest mistake ever done by US since Vietnam. Then he came to WBG and stared a regime based on secrecy and blame. Please get him out before is too late

paolo ~ May 16, 2007, 03:41 PM

Now that the mighty keeper of the comb is no longer welcome to attend the Berlin forum next week, his new found leather-booted buxom blonde will be most upset, as she lives in that very city. Never mind, perhaps this will give Wolfospitz a chance to make up and bury his saliva-laden head into Razor’s liberated bosom.

Cry Wolf ~ May 16, 2007, 04:53 PM

Je Ne Regrette Rien - that is the PW motto. You only need to read through his statements to see that he doesn't believe he has done anything wrong.... Where's Edith when you need her!

Edith Piaf ~ May 16, 2007, 05:36 PM

Message to World Bank Board:

Time is running out on YOUR credibility.

Fire this narcissist today, or you will be seen as the enabling stooges of the neocon coup leaders that stole two US elections and set this country on the path to its terminal decline, a pariah rogue regime among nations.

Is THAT what you want the World Bak to be a party to?

Osama Bin Laden is rolling on his carpet in victory glee at the unfolding collapse of another institution of the western enlightenment.

Enough ! End it !!

The Mahdi ~ May 16, 2007, 06:15 PM

Message to World Bank Board:

Time is running out on YOUR credibility.

Fire this narcissist today, or you will be seen as the enabling stooges of the neocon coup leaders that stole two US elections and set this country on the path to its terminal decline, a pariah rogue regime among nations.

Is THAT what you want the World Bak to be a party to?

Osama Bin Laden is rolling on his carpet in victory glee at the unfolding collapse of another institution of the western enlightenment.

Enough ! End it !!

The Mahdi ~ May 16, 2007, 06:16 PM

Presidents 1946 - Present Day

"Keep track of the rumored candidates, power plays and buzz."
The Washington Post

Next & Previous

« Wolfie pleads for his job but may resign | HOME | Another investigation of Wolfowitz and Riza starts at the State Department. »






Malloch Brown

Mr W's cronies

Mr W's past

Mr W's pledges




The Process

Tony Blair

World Bank president

"Offering the rumors and gossip usually reserved for Washington's bars and back rooms."

WBpresident.org in the news

Wolfowitz-Riza-Cleveland: New Evil-doing?
Wolfowitz's right hand man jumps ship.
Caught in the World Bank storm.
We're in the papers! worldbankpresident.org media mentions.
Hot blogging on the World Bank president.
Media contacts.
Card wants Snow.
New candidate, French views.
An £8200 job ad.
Bank chief's parting shots.

"Accomplished and intelligent… sifts through the speculation and brings you the latest news."
The Guardian

Recent Rumours

Zoellick bearhug photo.
Like old times: Zoellick and Lamy
Another middle aged white American for the World Bank !
Globe and Mail: Euros Already Agreed not to Raise Questions
Official: Zoellick according to AP.
It's (un)Official: Zoellick
Zoellick will get the nod from Germany.
An opportunity at the World Bank
UPI: Wolfowitz Replacement This Week
UK involvement in the Foundation for the Future.


The World Bank
Bretton Woods Project

Search this site


May 2007
April 2007
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005

ifiwatchnet     riverpath