Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Is Paul Wolfowitz' mistress a spy?

Posted by Guest Blogger at 9:33 AM on April 23, 2007.


Steve Clemons: Probably not, but the scandal raises serious questions about Shaha Riza's security clearance.
riza
riza

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Editor's note: this originally appeared in The Washington Note.


Last night, I had dinner with a long-time national security systems analyst who has worked in the Department of Defense and now works for one of the larger private think tanks funded mostly by government. She recounted to me how managing and coordinating large purchasing and acquisition networks in the national security business requires methodologies and approaches that few learn during their college education. That said, years ago, she was assigned an assistant who was brilliant and understood how the acquisitions process worked better than nearly anyone -- and who turned out to be a spy.

World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz's girlfriend, Shaha Riza, for whom Wolfowitz arranged not only jobs, incredible pay raises, automatic "outstanding" ratings in performance reviews, but also -- apparently -- a security clearance, is probably not a spy. But our system of national security "secrets management" is not based on trust. It's based on multi-pronged, overlapping constant investigation -- human and electronic.

It would be important for any senior State Department or Defense Department official tasked with maintaining the integrity and security of classified material and information to approach Shaha Riza -- a Libyan national raised in Saudi Arabia -- who was the "girlfriend" of the Deputy Secretary of Defense -- as if she could be a spy.

This is not a matter that those who would know Ms. Riza or who trust Wolfowitz's judgment should say "how dare someone raise that question?!" This should be the question that should have been asked at every stage of Shaha Riza's apparent penetration of the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the private firm, SAIC.

Sidney Blumenthal has laid out the core fundamental questions about the management of Shaha Riza's security clearance:

Riza, who is not a U.S. citizen, had to receive a security clearance in order to work at the State Department. Who intervened? It is not unusual to have British or French midlevel officers at the department on exchange programs, but they receive security clearances based on the clearances they already have with their host governments. Granting a foreign national who is detailed from an international organization a security clearance, however, is extraordinary, even unprecedented. So how could this clearance have been granted?
State Department officials familiar with the details of this matter confirmed to me that Shaha Ali Riza was detailed to the State Department and had unescorted access while working for Elizabeth Cheney. Access to the building requires a national security clearance or permanent escort by a person with such a clearance. But the State Department has no record of having issued a national security clearance to Riza.
State Department officials believe that Riza was issued such a clearance by the Defense Department after SAIC was forced by Wolfowitz and Feith to hire her. Then her clearance would have been recognized by the State Department through a credentials transmittal letter and Riza would have accessed the State Department on Pentagon credentials, using her Pentagon clearance to get a State Department building pass with a letter issued under instructions from Liz Cheney.
But State Department officials tell me that no such letter can be confirmed as received. And the officials stress that the department would never issue a clearance to a non-U.S. citizen as part of a contractual requisition. Issuing a national security clearance to a foreign national under instructions from a Pentagon official would constitute a violation of the executive orders governing clearances, they say.
Given these circumstances, the inspector general of the Defense Department should be ordered to investigate how Shaha Ali Riza was issued a Pentagon security clearance. And the inspector general of the State Department should investigate who ordered Riza's building pass and whether there was a Pentagon credentials transmittal letter.
Senator Jay Rockefeller, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, or Rep. Henry Waxman, who is one of the best and most tenacious investigators of government abuses, or some other concerned member of Congress should call for a Department of Defense investigation into Riza's security clearance, Wolfowitz's role in fast-tracking the clearance, and the State Department's seeming absence of any record confirming her clearance when Shaha Riza was granted unescorted access at the Department of State.

This "could" be serious -- and the question of whether Shaha Riza is a spy or not should not be a matter for pundits to debate. Anyone getting access to the nation's secrets is scrutinized as a potential leaker, a potential spy -- but it appears on the surface that Paul Wolfowitz may have helped his girlfriend get in on the inside without much of that scrutiny.

Joshua adds ...

Have you noticed that Riza is frequently referred to in the media as Paul Wolfowitz' "girlfriend." Usually, when a man is married, the other woman is referred to as a "mistress" -- "girl friend" implies that the guy's single.

Maybe it's just me.

Digg!

Tagged as: world bank, wolfowitz, riza


Dobbs to Quit CNN
Dobbs, under fire, to seek greener pastures.
Post by Staff. November 11, 2009.
Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship
Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry.
Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009.
Murdoch and Murdoch Flak Confused About Racism, Truth
What must it be like to do spin for News Corps?
Post by Tana Ganeva. November 11, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Well, we already know that AIPAC spied on us and we did nothing....
Posted by: Prophit on Apr 23, 2007 10:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.. to remove that organization from the powerful position it occupies in our political system. This article about an Arab and the comments by Mr. Blumenthal are totally speculation and upon which we are now suppose to tighten up our security processes.

How funny!!!!!! I guess it just depends on whether your being spied on by your friends, neutral parties or your enemies huh???? LOL

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He's a Republican, and they do not have 'mistresses'
Posted by: djnoll on Apr 23, 2007 10:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Joshua, when the former Speaker of the House keeps a woman (now his wife) for seven years in a townhouse in Georgetown, while taking a President to task for a blow-job, you begin to understand the nature of the Republican moral code. They do not keep mistresses, they have "girl-friends", friends who are female. The fact that the friendship is sexual, is to them, a moot point. And, like most men of power who keep mistresses, they insure that these women have access to good jobs with high salaries, so that they do not have to account to their wives for where their paychecks are going each month. There is nothing quite so foolish as an old, ugly man getting something on the side for which he has to pay.

It is not so nice to know that the double standards of Wolfowitz and Gingrich are still alive and well in this government. Funny, you would almost think that they were Muslim and still believed that they were entitled to 4 wives as long as they kept them in the same style, albeit at public expense, and at the risk of national security in this case. Whoops, sorry, not Muslim, just hypocritical Christians once again showing their stripes on another moral issue, and this one with serious security risks attached. Nothing like a man thinking with another head to help this country along on its way to a fall.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» IOKIYAR Posted by: Joshua Holland
She's "probably not" a spy?
Posted by: motamanx on Apr 23, 2007 10:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given the track record of all the other vicissitudes of this administration, who would be surprised if she were?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» She's a Spy... Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: She's a Spy... Posted by: Steven Wanzell
Riza is no spy. A self-serving greedy neocon? Absolutely!
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 23, 2007 1:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
During her Pentagon days, Miss Riza was also the mistress of Paul Wolfowitz who, at the time, served as DOD Under-Secretary. Before joining her spit-shined "lover" at the World Bank, she worked for Science Applications International Corp (SAIC), a job obtained with the help of arch neocon Doug Feith.

And what is SAIC? According to SourceWatch, it was founded in 1969 as a “scientific consulting firm with a handful of government contracts for nuclear power and nuclear weapons effects study programs."

Over the years, the company expanded into national and homeland security programs, non-nuclear energy studies, health care systems, environment-related businesses, information technologies, high-technology products, telecommunications, transportation and eSolutions services and products for commercial and government customers.

In 1990, SAIC was indicted and pled guilty to 10 felony counts of fraud on a Superfund site, called “one of the largest (cases) of environmental fraud in Los Angeles history." In 2006, SAIC had some 44,000 employees and took in $8 billion.

Reported Vanity Fair in March 2007, SAIC is “larger than the departments of Labor, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development combined. SAIC's largest customer by far is the U.S. government, which accounts for 69 percent of its business,"

Vanity Fair also said that SAIC executives have been involved at every stage of the Iraq war -- from pushing WMD claims to helping "investigate how American intelligence could have been so disastrously wrong."

"Under yet another no-bid contract," reported Vanity,“ SAIC created the Iraqi Media Network, supposedly a free and independent indigenous media network that quickly became a mouthpiece for the Pentagon. Eventually, the network was turned over to Iraqi control. Today it is a tool of Iraq's Shiite majority and spews out virulently anti-American messages. Moreover, SAIC's work on the Iraqi Media Network was criticized by the Pentagon's Inspector General as having ‘widespread violations of normal contracting procedures.’”

I could rant forever about SAIC and their treasonous neocon associates, but here are two tidbits worth closing my comment with : (1) David Kay, the former UN weapons inspector hired by the CIA in June 2003 to to track down Iraqi WMDs, works for SAIC and (2) Robert Gates is a former board member.

Hugh E. Scott, editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption. AlterNet readers who object to my NON-PROFIT campaign to expose President Bush as a lying crook can email me through the website rather than comment here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We don't call them "borderless-billionaires" for nothing
Posted by: channing on Apr 23, 2007 5:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They do not work for US national interests, they do depend on US national trust and funding.

They operate without exclusive accountability to any "nation-state" that is named on a map.

They run government enterprise from within a privileged grasp of connections and and "by-laws", (like the Iraq "Hydrocarbon Law") with nearly 0, ZERO public exposure.

Their only interest in "peace" is in keeping it inviable and inaccessible to the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "faked" is the word Posted by: channing
Crony-gate
Posted by: Badger1492 on Apr 24, 2007 8:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do we expect anything else from the current administration and its friends?

As the kids used to say, "why am I not surprised?"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spy, no.
Posted by: xbj on Apr 24, 2007 3:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tasteless half-blind gold-digging Nazicon whore?

Your call. The women of the Third Reich were not THAT picky either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]