Ex-State Dept employees allege corruption in Iraq

Tuesday 13th May, 04:45 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 17 Total Comments Show All

adaydream at 02:24 PM JST - 13th May

Sure there was corruption. But that was the Old Iraqi's business.

The new Iraq is stealing U. S. taxpayers dollars. Money that we're already borrowing from China, because Iraq won't release any oi it's oil revenue, because the parliment refuses to act.

The bush administration has been blocking investigations from the onset of the war.

It wasn't until the democrats took congress before an investigation was even authorized. The republicans blocked every effort to investigate corruption charges.
skipthesong at 04:15 PM JST - 13th May

The republicans blocked every effort to investigate corruption charges." Now do you see what I mean? The Dems block investigations into Bosnia..

When will the real people who want to run the country come out?

It takes work and patience" and a two party system!
Madverts at 05:43 PM JST - 13th May

Whitehawk,

"Um, rjd_jr, you're not actually suggesting that Iraq never had corruption in its government prior to the war, are you?"

Does that make it any better?
nucular at 05:48 PM JST - 13th May

"Ex-State Dept employees allege corruption in Iraq"

Slow news day/week/month ?

Basra too tranquil for the press these days?
SezWho2 at 06:10 PM JST - 13th May

skipthesong,

I agree with you as to the problem, but I think it takes more than that to solve it. I think it takes the weakening of the office of the president to something more in line with what the founding fathers envisioned. With a unitary presidency, the office of the president becomes--of necessity--a political prize which, when combined with a congressional majority, results in the ability to ram home strictly partisan legislation and which, when confronted with a minority, results in gridlock.

In the steadily growing environment of powerful presidency, I think it is natural that a Republican president with a Republican majority would seek to block bad news and that the bad news would begin to come out when the majority is lost. Ditto for the Democrats. Nobody wants to go out and tell the taxpayers that we wasted $18B. But I think the truth is that Legislative is severely impeded in performing oversight when the Executive holds itself above it.
nucular at 06:32 PM JST - 13th May

sezwho2 : "I think it takes the weakening of the office of the president to something more in line with what the founding fathers envisioned."

The Long War, the War on Terror - of which Iraq is but one front - represents a completely new set of challenges facing the democratic governments of the free world that AlQaeda and those bent on reestablishing a world Caliphate are presently waging war against.

You may not like it but the United States is foremost among these democracies, which makes all the more ludicrous the notion that a weakened presidency is what the founding fathers ever could have wanted:

"Energy in the Executive, # 70 (Hamilton) (Federalists Papers) "

"Energy in the Executive is a leading character in the definition of good government. It is essential to the protection of the community against foreign attacks; it is not less essential to the steady administration of the laws; to the protection of property against those irregular and high-handed combinations which sometimes interrupt the ordinary course of justice; to the security of liberty against the enterprises and assaults of ambition, of faction, and of anarchy...

[...]

"Those politicians and statesmen who have been the most celebrated for the soundness of their principles and for the justice of their views, have declared in favor of a single Executive and a numerous legislature. They have with great propriety, considered energy as the most necessary qualification of the former, and have regarded this as most applicable to power in a single hand, while they have, with equal propriety, considered the latter as best adapted to deliberation and wisdom, and best calculated to conciliate the confidence of the people and to secure their privileges and interests. "
WhiteHawk at 09:52 PM JST - 13th May

Madverts:

Does that make it any better?

No, but it does explain where the corruption is rooted. The Bush administration didn't "put" corruption in the Iraqi government. You start a new government with some of the same people from the corrupt former government, add in tribal leaders who were already corrupt, and -wow!- the government will still be corrupt. rjd_jr seemed to be suggesting that the corruption started with the war, and didn't exist before we got there.

The corruption should be stopped, but I don't see how we'll have any more success than any other government has had with their own.
adaydream at 10:03 PM JST - 13th May

You start a new government with some of the same people from the corrupt former government, add in tribal leaders who were already corrupt, and -wow!- the government will still be corrupt.

Please, you know that the US got rid of everybody who was in the old regime. None of the Baathist were kept in office. The bush administration made sure that none of them were left in office.

The US sent over $8,000,000,000.00 in $100.00 bills. It took a couple of trucks to carry all the cash. Then most of it comes up missing.

It wasn't till last year that they started rehiring members of the old Baathist party. Thed US found out that they needed these Baathists to help run the government.

There have been numereous investigations of Halliburton that have been blocked. dick cheney's company that received NO-BID contracts. But it's been hands off with investigating Halliburton crimes of theft.
SezWho2 at 01:28 AM JST - 14th May

nucular,

That strikes me as thoughtless pap, especially the notion that today we have a "new set of challenges". Every day in every age has brought new challenges. Thankfully, not every day has brought us tyrants who plead the necessity of new challenges to arrogate more power for themselves.

As for Hamilton, there is considerable difference between having an Executive with energy and having an Executive who is free from oversight.
WhiteHawk at 02:28 AM JST - 14th May

adaydream:

Please, you know that the US got rid of everybody who was in the old regime. None of the Baathist were kept in office. The bush administration made sure that none of them were left in office.

You forgot about the tribal leaders. But nice try to "blame Bush and only Bush".

The US sent over $8,000,000,000.00 in $100.00 bills. It took a couple of trucks to carry all the cash. Then most of it comes up missing.

Not unlike the money Clinton gave to Haiti, eh? You're only helping prove my point that Iraqi (heck, Middle Eastern) leaders are inherently corrupt.

There have been numereous investigations of Halliburton that have been blocked. dick cheney's company that received NO-BID contracts. But it's been hands off with investigating Halliburton crimes of theft.

Ooohhh, Halliburton! A subject that has been discussed to death on other threads, and has nothing to do with this one. So other than a diversionary tactic, what's your point? You want to discuss the Bosnia investigations that the Clinton administration blocked?
adaydream at 03:04 AM JST - 14th May

WhiteHawk:

You forgot about the tribal leaders.

Real good. But it's not the tribal leaders who controlled the cash. It's the Americans and the Iraqi government who controlled the cash. They are the ones who distributed it or stole it from the safe.

So tell me how much money was lost in Haiti?

Did Bill Clinton control the cash? You'd like that to be so, so you can place more blame on him. Don't get me wrong Bill Clinton wasn't some angel, but he wasn't involved in the theft of any money stolen in Haiti. No more than george bush was personally involved in the theft of $8,000,000,000.00 in Iraq. The tribal leaders were the recipiants, not the distributors.

Halliburton! A subject that has been discussed to death on other threads-So other than a diversionary tactic, what's your point?

My point here is that Halliburton has over billed the US government $Billions of dollars. In case you haven't heard about such things, here's a couple of links.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7606-2004Oct28.html http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12266 http://oversight.house.gov/investigations.asp?start=50&Issue=Iraq+Reconstruction

It appears that you are trying to either defend the theft of US taxpayers funds by the Iraqi government and US personnel or just looking to try to blame these actions and charsacterize them as actions Bill Clinton did. If it went on in Haiti by Haiti government personnel or US personnel, then they ought to have been persecuted.
WhiteHawk at 04:39 AM JST - 14th May

adaydream:

Real good. But it's not the tribal leaders who controlled the cash. It's the Americans and the Iraqi government who controlled the cash. They are the ones who distributed it or stole it from the safe.

And without the Baathists, what was the Iraqi government comprised of? Tribal leaders, perhaps?

Did Bill Clinton control the cash?

So when Bill Clinton hands out foreign aid money, his administration doesn't control it after it leaves his hands, but the when George W. Bush hands out foreign aid money, his administration stills controls it after it leaves his hands. Is that what you are suggesting?

It appears that you are trying to either defend the theft of US taxpayers funds by the Iraqi government and US personnel or just looking to try to blame these actions and charsacterize them as actions Bill Clinton did.

Nope. Read on.

If it went on in Haiti by Haiti government personnel or US personnel, then they ought to have been persecuted.

Now there's something we can agree on. In each case, Iraqi and Haiti, the people responsible should be caught and prosecuted. I'm just wondering where you and your criticism were during the Haiti fraud.
adaydream at 05:11 AM JST - 14th May

WhiteHawk:

And without the Baathists, what was the Iraqi government comprised of? Tribal leaders, perhaps?

You had all the self-exiled Iraqis. You had Americans in charge till after they had their elections. Self-exiled Iraqis and Americans. That's where it went.

but the when George W. Bush hands out foreign aid money

I never mentioned george bush on this post I don't think.

And when Haiti was going on I was dealing with getting out of the service, not being in a combat unit so who cared and children. There were more important things going on.
WhiteHawk at 07:36 AM JST - 14th May

adaydream:

You had all the self-exiled Iraqis. You had Americans in charge till after they had their elections. Self-exiled Iraqis and Americans. That's where it went.

Hey, if you've got definitive proof of that, you better turn it over and aid the investigation.
adaydream at 09:15 AM JST - 14th May

WhiteHawk:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/091905J.shtml

Just one of many thefts.