MORE ON UNSCAM — and a prediction:
Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, Michigan Republican, told a House International Relations Committee hearing last week that the U.N. oil-for-food scandal reminded him of down-home political influence-buying and corruption in his Wayne County district.
“In many ways, we are seeing a political machine that is accused of doing something wrong and the tactics that the machine uses to defend itself are quite similar,” he said.
“There will be confusion, distraction and an internal investigation controlled by the machine, the results of which may or may not be for public consumption. And it is all to defend the institution.”
Yes, they’re in full damage-control mode. And, writes Arnold Ahlert in the New York Post, they’re getting help:
Why? Because the truth about France, Germany and Russia’s opposition to the war in Iraq might not be helpful for Democrats in the 2004 elections. The party and their presidential candidate, who worship at the altar of “U.N. solutions” for world problems (including terror) might be forced to admit that the object of their continuing affection is a cesspool of anti-American, bribe-taking liars. Liars who are perfectly willing to stonewall any investigation – apparently with the blessings of certain Democratic committee members.
Will the press keep digging? And, given how unpopular the U.N. is with American voters, will Democrats really want to line up behind it? I’m disappointed in Tom Lantos’ comments, but I can’t believe that they represent a Democratic strategy rather than personal disappointment.
UPDATE: Madhu Dahiya is writing her local paper asking why it isn’t covering the oil-for-food scandal. She emails:
I intend to keep e-mailing every single day until I receive a response! (Well, the ombudsperson did send me back a reply saying she/he? would forward my e-mail to the foreign affairs desk, but nothing yet!). Actually, it’s kind of fun to keep e-mailing into the air this way. Kind of all zen and stuff.
Made up (not actual) examples:
1. Nice article on Friends….where’s the UN oil for food article?
2. Nice article on the Bosox….where’s the UN oil for food article?
3. Nice article on windsurfing…..where’s the UN oil for food article?
Heh.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Kevin McCreavy emails:
Just wanted to let you know – I have emailed the editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer 3 times regarding their lack of coverage of the Oil for food fiasco. I let the know that if the name Halliburton or Enron had popped up in the lists of those taking bribes then they probably would’ve covered it. Anyway, after the first letter, they said they were considering it for publication, but of course that never happened as far as I can tell. And since then, no response.
Inquiring minds would love to know why the silence.
Indeed. And the Halliburton/Enron point is surely true.
MORE: Josh Marshall is suspicious that Chalabi is behind this whole thing, but notes: “Let me be clear, I don’t think any of this means that these allegations are not true. I figure that most of them are.”
Well, I don’t know if they’re true — though given how guilty Kofi Annan, et al., are acting, I, too, figure that most of them are. What’s most interesting to me, though, are the flexible standards of fairness that let the most absurd Halliburton-related charges fly across the wires, while people exercise meticulous care in other circumstances. And does anyone doubt that if these documents contained accusations that Halliburton got money from Saddam, it would have gotten an entire episode of Nightline?