Foxfyre wrote:Except the U.S. hasn't been included (for once) in the allegations that funds were misappropriated. Why is that, I wonder?
Hey, if Sofia wants to start saying the US doesn't deserve any money ans such she is free to do so. <shrugs>
Quote:I don't know if there's anything to this at all, but there is an awfully lot of smoke.
Oh, there was corruption alright.
Quote: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?
Perhaps you mistake not wanting to jump to conclusions with Sofia as lacking interest. I have been following it closely since long before the war in Iraq.
The claims of corruption were made years ago and I have always been interested.
Now you may think there is disproportionate interest, but then again, I suspect you think this is a really important scoop that is inherently related to the whole Iraq debate.
That's your prerogative but I'm willing to bet that this is more pedestrian corruption.
Quote: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?
Well, the burden of proof is on the ones claiming that it did influence "the vote". They have not a shred of evidence for doing so.
If you would like to assert that this did influence the vote feel free to do so instead of asking me to argue a negative.
But if you want a quick taste of what the counter argument would be like:
1) The corruption being alleged involves individuals and not that many of them.
2) None of the individuals involves have the ability to make any decisions about the security council votes.
If you, as Sofia, think that the individual corruption motivated whole countries and populations to oppose the war
I welcome your attempt to make this case. It will be fun.
