You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
International-UN-NGOs
Under Eye of U.N., Billions for Hussein
2004-08-13
Breaking News! (well, at least to the NYT) Just a taste.
Since the fall of Mr. Hussein, the oil-for-food program has received far more scrutiny than it ever did during its six years of operation. Congress's Government Accountability Office, formerly the General Accounting Office, has estimated that the Iraqi leader siphoned at least $10 billion from the program by illicitly trading in oil and collecting kickbacks from companies that had United Nations approval to do business with Iraq. Multiple investigations now under way in Washington and Iraq and at the United Nations all center on one straightforward question: How did Mr. Hussein amass so much money while under international sanctions? An examination of the program, the largest in the United Nations' history, suggests an equally straightforward answer: The United Nations let him do it. "Everybody said it was a terrible shame and against international law, but there was really no enthusiasm to tackle it," said Peter van Walsum, a Dutch diplomat who headed the Iraq sanctions committee in 1999 and 2000, recalling the discussions of illegal oil surcharges. "We never had clear decisions on anything. So we just in effect condoned things."
Guess the Times couldn't ignore it any longer.
Posted by:Steve

#5  Lotsa coverage of the NJ Gay Governor, nothing like a good sex scandal to divert the plebs...
Posted by: mojo   2004-08-13 4:39:56 PM  

#4  ...The UN that John Kerry wants to engage more closely, that is.

I think the story is remarkable for 2 reasons:
1) the New York Times actually carried it.
2) They got a named person on record as saying:

"Everybody said it was a terrible shame and against international law, but there was really no enthusiasm to tackle it. We never had clear decisions on anything. So we just in effect condoned things."

I guess that's "nuance" for ya.
Posted by: eLarson   2004-08-13 4:21:09 PM  

#3  Nothing like an impending implosion of the Kerry / Viet Nam house of cards to push other shocking "new" news to the fore, "Kerry? John Kerry? Nothing to see there but just LOOK at how awful the UN is!"
Posted by: AzCat   2004-08-13 3:59:06 PM  

#2  Seeing as how the WaPo scooped 'em on the SwiftVets coverage, they had to bring out a story they were holding for a 'special occasion'...

/sarcasm
Posted by: Pappy   2004-08-13 3:16:57 PM  

#1  judging from the number of posts here, it appears they were correct in judging the length of time it would take for this story to be considered yesterday’s news
Posted by: B   2004-08-13 3:02:23 PM  

00:00