Remarks from the Fray:
I applaud Hitchens's concerns about dirty deals between Saddam Hussein's regime and unscrupulous Western interests that attempted to subvert the U.N. "Oil for Food" program. As Hitchens rightly says, these deals helped simultaneously prop up a vicious dictatorship and enrich these Western interests at the direct expense of the poorest and most endangered members of Iraqi society. If Galloway was involved in such crooked deals, an 18-day suspension from Parliament is indeed insufficient.
And while we're at it, let's not play favorites. Any and all entities who cooperated and colluded with Saddam should be prosecuted as well. Take for example Chevron oil. As a story in the International Herald Tribune informed its readers in May, 2007, "Chevron, the second-largest American oil company, is preparing to acknowledge that it should have known kickbacks were being paid to Saddam Hussein on oil it bought from Iraq as part of a defunct United Nations program, according to investigators."
As an interesting coincidence, did you know that current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was a director at Chevron between 1991 and 2001, which appears to overlap with the period of Chevron's deals with Saddam—you know, the ones where they "should have been aware that illegal kickbacks were being paid?" A company press release lauded Rice and her services to Chevron upon her transition into the Bush administration noted "For the past two years Rice chaired the board's Public Policy Committee."
I heard that Chevron even tried to name an oil tanker after her . . .
So, Chris, if, as you say, "The 'anti-war' movement is not blameless in all this," wouldn't it have been fair—as well as intellectually honest—to note such a "complication" affecting a prominent American oil company and a prominent member of the Bush administration's inner circle? Is it about a sincere concern for right and wrong, and the terrible suffering that was inflicted on Iraqis during Saddam's regime, or is it just about fricking politics and personal pissing matches with people like George Galloway?
--fingerpuppet
(To reply, click here.)
(7/24)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Supporters of Health Reform Give Democrats a Big, Wet, Expensive Kiss
Lithwick Reports From the Supreme Court Hearing on Giving Juveniles Life Without Parole
Mad Men: Will Sally Draper Ever Forgive Her Father?
The Weirdly Sexual New Ad for Halls Lozenges
It's a Bad Idea for the Government To Cap Malpractice Awards
How Many Times Can Someone Fire a Pistol in Seven Minutes?
Remarks from the Fray:
I applaud Hitchens's concerns about dirty deals between Saddam Hussein's regime and unscrupulous Western interests that attempted to subvert the U.N. "Oil for Food" program. As Hitchens rightly says, these deals helped simultaneously prop up a vicious dictatorship and enrich these Western interests at the direct expense of the poorest and most endangered members of Iraqi society. If Galloway was involved in such crooked deals, an 18-day suspension from Parliament is indeed insufficient.
And while we're at it, let's not play favorites. Any and all entities who cooperated and colluded with Saddam should be prosecuted as well. Take for example Chevron oil. As a story in the International Herald Tribune informed its readers in May, 2007, "Chevron, the second-largest American oil company, is preparing to acknowledge that it should have known kickbacks were being paid to Saddam Hussein on oil it bought from Iraq as part of a defunct United Nations program, according to investigators."
As an interesting coincidence, did you know that current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was a director at Chevron between 1991 and 2001, which appears to overlap with the period of Chevron's deals with Saddam—you know, the ones where they "should have been aware that illegal kickbacks were being paid?" A company press release lauded Rice and her services to Chevron upon her transition into the Bush administration noted "For the past two years Rice chaired the board's Public Policy Committee."
I heard that Chevron even tried to name an oil tanker after her . . .
So, Chris, if, as you say, "The 'anti-war' movement is not blameless in all this," wouldn't it have been fair—as well as intellectually honest—to note such a "complication" affecting a prominent American oil company and a prominent member of the Bush administration's inner circle? Is it about a sincere concern for right and wrong, and the terrible suffering that was inflicted on Iraqis during Saddam's regime, or is it just about fricking politics and personal pissing matches with people like George Galloway?
--fingerpuppet
(To reply, click here.)
(7/24)