The Wolfowitz non-story

Related to my article this morning on the Wolfowitz non-story, Ruth Wedgwood,  professor of international law and diplomacy at Johns Hopkins University's School for Advanced International Studies, has an opinion piece in today's Los Angeles Times worth reading:
... The authors of this acrid affair have nakedly forgotten the standards of fairness and due process owed Riza, who is a member of the bank staff association and entitled to its fiduciary protections. And the scandal-mongers have recklessly ignored a written record of bank documents that serves not to condemn but to exculpate Wolfowitz.

Moreover, the case reveals the bank's executive board and its ethics committee as organs of haphazard judgment. In 2005, the ethics committee surprisingly denied Wolfowitz's written request that he be allowed to recuse himself from all decisions touching on Riza's status because of their relationship. Then it disqualified her from remaining at the bank yet insisted that she be compensated for this disruption to her career. Next, it insisted that Wolfowitz re-enter the chain of command to execute its advice concerning Riza. And now, board members apparently have criticized Wolfowitz for doing exactly what the ethics panel directed.
Of course, the facts mean little. Having scored some damage with the first outrageous slanders, you can be sure that more will follow, all of the same caliber but all based on the knowledge that the cumulative effect on the non-attentive news watcher will be substantial. Remember what I asked you to do:Just Say No until the facts have time to catch up to the lies.

h/t hit & run
Related to my article this morning on the Wolfowitz non-story, Ruth Wedgwood,  professor of international law and diplomacy at Johns Hopkins University's School for Advanced International Studies, has an opinion piece in today's Los Angeles Times worth reading:
... The authors of this acrid affair have nakedly forgotten the standards of fairness and due process owed Riza, who is a member of the bank staff association and entitled to its fiduciary protections. And the scandal-mongers have recklessly ignored a written record of bank documents that serves not to condemn but to exculpate Wolfowitz.

Moreover, the case reveals the bank's executive board and its ethics committee as organs of haphazard judgment. In 2005, the ethics committee surprisingly denied Wolfowitz's written request that he be allowed to recuse himself from all decisions touching on Riza's status because of their relationship. Then it disqualified her from remaining at the bank yet insisted that she be compensated for this disruption to her career. Next, it insisted that Wolfowitz re-enter the chain of command to execute its advice concerning Riza. And now, board members apparently have criticized Wolfowitz for doing exactly what the ethics panel directed.
Of course, the facts mean little. Having scored some damage with the first outrageous slanders, you can be sure that more will follow, all of the same caliber but all based on the knowledge that the cumulative effect on the non-attentive news watcher will be substantial. Remember what I asked you to do:Just Say No until the facts have time to catch up to the lies.

h/t hit & run