I was watching Claudia Rosett, fellow of the Foundation to Defense of Democracies, being interviewed on C-SPAN. She is one of the key figures in exposing the corruption behind the UN Oil-for-Food program. It is amazing how this has become a partisan debate. Just look at some of the questions she was during the interview:
Caller: I’ve got a question and a comment. You call it a scandal, I don’t because nothing happens with the United States knowing it, right? Where was Halliburton during all this time? Still doing business with Saddam. All I want you to do is follow the money trail. Who’s going to benefit from it?
Host: There is also this related email. Please discuss the difference between Vice-President Cheney’s exit package from his company, Halliburton, prior to taking office and Kofi Annan’s son’s exit package.
Translation: VP Cheney is a bad man! So whatever the UN did must be irrelavent.
Claudia Rosett: Sure. The difference is you know a great deal more, a couple of differences, you know a great deal more about what went on with Dick Cheney. We have rules of disclosure and of conflict of interest that the UN appears not to have had at all. A piece of the story I didn’t get to earlier is that the UN Secretariat never told us about this relationship [Kojo Annan and Connecta], they were confronted by the British press in 1999 and said there was a relationship but it ended already. They were confronted again in September with evidence again from the press that his relationship had continued through 1999, the end of that year and they finally conceded yeah but it is over. Then they were confronted again with evidence that in fact Kojo Annan had received payments through early this year and once again they said well that turns out to be true, but we were not aware of it. You have to ask how well do they monitor what’s going on with their major contractors. And the other difference is you will, you had a situation where, I trying to think of how to exactly…basically you have a great deal more transparency – I wouldn’t defend anything, I think when Halliburton went to work in Iraq last year it should have been an open bidding and it should have been competitive, I think this the way these things should be done, under these circumstances. But none of that, in any way, excuses the enormous fraud that went on under Oil-for-Food. In other words you can questions some of the things about Halliburton that doesn’t mean Oil-for-Food isn’t an enormous scandal in it’s own right.Questioner: I looked at the website (the foundation for the defend of democracy: defenddemocracy.org) and it appears that Republican insiders dominate the FDD’s board and staff, it also appears that they are coordinating her appearance on CNN [sic] and with the Reverend Moon owned Washington Times article today and she is an alum of the Wall Street Journal. CNN [sic] have you completely abandoned any sense of objectivity and fair reporting? Are you completely dominated by these people?
Translation: Republicans can't possibly be interest in the truth. Besides only wackos are interested in spreading freedom (or where those people supposed to be liberals, oh, I get so confused...)
Interviewer: Thank you caller. By the way we are C-Span not CNN but I thank you anyhow. Claudia Rosett, did you want to respond to the callers point.
CM: Oh yeah, of course…One of the reply’s is this is no way coordinated. I think it is simply that the story is getting a lot of coverage; I didn’t know the Washington Times piece would be out this morning. And the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy has on it’s board, along with – you’re right many well know Republican names here but we also have Al Gores’ former campaign manager Donna Brazile, we have Chuck Schumer.* It’s a mix and you are right it’s dominated, but those people have to find something here worth signing onto. I think what they signed onto is a foundation that is basically dedicated to looking for ways to counter terrorism in the world of ideas and thus the Defend Democracy; the belief is that promoting democracy is a good idea. My own alum status with the Wall Street Journal is no secret, I’m proud of it and I wrote for them for many years and the main lines in which I argued when I wrote for their opinion pages, in which I still write a column for their website, is, I think the slogan is “Free Men and Free Markets”. I very much believe and this is why I am glad to be affiliated with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy and the real answer in the end is open, transparent, accountable government – Democracy. Thank you.
I would think that both the left and the right would be interested in non-corrupt UN. The right would prefer to have an effective UN that was interested in promoting it's charter of advancing peace, human rights, justice and freedom Furthermore, the case the left made against the War in Iraq would have been much stronger without evidence that Saddam Hussein was (allegedly)using the UN to rebuild his regime and (allegedly) attempted to buy votes on the UN Security Council. But of course this is why the loonies have come out of the woodwork. Much of their worldview would be crushed if their dream of all good and mighty world government proves to be illusory. So HALLIBURTON! NEOCON CONSPIRACY! BUSH LIES! it is.
*(As per the FDD website) Who are some of the figures involved with FDD? FDD's board members and advisors range across the political spectrum. Our founding members and distinguished advisors are Steve Forbes, Jack Kemp, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Frank Lautenberg, Newt Gingrich and James Woolsey. Our advisors include member of Congress from both parties, as well as leading political figures from opposite sides of the political spectrum such as Gary Bauer and Donna Brazile. This diverse group is united in recognizing the dangers
facing the United States and the importance of defending the our core values of political and religious freedom, so that we can go on disagreeing the way people in democratic societies do – peacefully.
