The UN's Great Cash Cow

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Does anybody think anything is really going to come of all this? Who polices the UN?

Posted whole article from NY TImes - Registration required
_________________________
The Great Cash Cow
By WILLIAM SAFIRE

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,313 • Replies: 24

No top replies

indeed.... who watches the watchers?

0 Replies

Okay, anybody have a good answer here? When the UN misbehaves, who has the authority to call them on it? It seems that in the oil for food scandal they are investigating themselves. Is this acceptable? Anybody know?

0 Replies

wow this is incredible, next thing you know the pentagon will be investigating the military prison abuse cases or maybe even the white house will investigate it's own release of confidential information about CIA employees. it boggles the mind. perhaps Cheney will investigate Haliburton overcharges in Iraq. Nah, not in america. lets see, 10 billion skimmed, odds are that at least 5 billion was payoffs to US and other companies for "services rendered" (all in the spirit of capitalism)

0 Replies

Or the US deciding whether or not it was legal to invade Iraq.

But, indeed, it is hard a to find independent investigators.

0 Replies

Bump

(duplicate post)

0 Replies

Only in America does the presented issue receive no attention, but serves as a trigger to bring up a half dozen or so other issues. And I'm not picking on you specifically Dys. The 'other side' does it as well and its just as frustrating.

I don't mind when comparisons are made in order to illustrate a point. I do mind when an issue is completely deflected and/or dismissed by the 'you/they do it too' or 'you/they do worse' defense.

In the issues Dys raised, however, we are policing our own resources, not those entrusted to us by others...

0 Replies

whew, Exxon Mobil Corp. and ChevronTexaco Corp. confirmed that they are among companies receiving a subpoena from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York investigating alleged improprieties in the United Nations' oil-for-food program in Iraq, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

0 Replies

I can't understand the inability or refusal to discuss the UN. Halliburton et al are given ample treatment on other threads.

Why do people refuse to discuss the UN?

0 Replies

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the UN. I do so all the time.

Perhaps you want more people to bash it (as opposed to merely discuss it)?

0 Replies

lets bash the UN and Bush on the same thread, It will be fun and we won't mention Clinton (he gets all the liberal press anyway)

0 Replies

Craven--

Do you think the money funnelled through the OFF program colored the votes of those who received it?

Do you think members should continue to pay into funds administrated by the UN during the investigation?

0 Replies

sofia, any decent lawyer could tell you "never ask a question you don't want to hear the answer to"

0 Replies

decent lawyer?

I did think there may be some of the un-conservative persuasion, who may have some criticism/opinion of the UN re the OFF program.

Its been verrry quiet on that front.

Guess the UN is above criticism here.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

Do you think the money funnelled through the OFF program colored the votes of those who received it?

What votes? Are you trying to allege that individuals who might have profited from the arrangement had Security Council votes?

Quote:

Do you think members should continue to pay into funds administrated by the UN during the investigation?

Of course. This has nothing to do with UN dues, and the corruption alleged has to do with purchases of oil that are wholly unrelated to UN dues.

So perhaps your question should be whether people should continue to purchase oil from Saddam Hussein.

That is currently not possible.

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

decent lawyer?

I did think there may be some of the un-conservative persuasion, who may have some criticism/opinion of the UN re the OFF program.

Its been verrry quiet on that front.

Guess the UN is above criticism here.

This is silly. Many lefties criticize the UN, you are simply complaining that we do not share your opinon on this particular issue.

0 Replies

haven't seen anyone of the leftie persuasion criticise the UN handling of the OFF program.

I have only seen them change the subject.

You still don't address your opinion of the UN handling of OFF funds, or if the UN delegates of countries recieving funds voted for Saddam to remain in power due to the millions they, or associated entities, received...

How can I complain that opinions don't coincide with mine, if I haven't even seen opinions?

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

haven't seen anyone of the leftie persuasion criticise the UN handling of the OFF program.

So? That's in line with what I said. Lefties have in fact criticized the UN and have in fact discussed the OFF program.

Your complaint is simply that people do not agree with you on this particular subject and join you in bashing the UN.

Quote:

You still don't address your opinion of the UN handling of OFF funds, or if the UN delegates of countries recieving funds voted for Saddam to remain in power due to the millions they, or associated entities, received...

Actually I have, or at least what I understand from this sentence.

No, I do not think the OFF played a part in any "vote for Saddam to remain in power".

But then again, there was no such "vote for Saddam to remain in power" and this is another deceitful fabrication.

Quote:

How can I complain that opinions don't coincide with mine, if I haven't even seen opinions?

Well, for starters you could whine about how you haven't seen enough opinions that correlate with yours.

0 Replies

I forgot one thing:

The USA was part of the sanctions committee that approved all the contracts.

Using Sofia's reasoning this should be a tremendous indictment of the USA and all of our motives and decisions in Iraq.

0 Replies

Except the U.S. hasn't been included (for once) in the allegations that funds were misappropriated. Why is that, I wonder?

I don't know if there's anything to this at all, but there is an awfully lot of smoke. Usually a tiny wisp is all that is necessary to get a raging debate, discussion, diatribe, something going on many other subjects. Why not on OFF? I agree it has been mentioned here and there. But why so little passion? So little apparent interest on this?

For that matter, Craven, why are you thinking that this particular issue would not have einfluenced the votes on Iraq? What is your rationale for thinking that?

0 Replies

The UN's Great Cash Cow

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know