Originally Posted by c00k1e
This is the type of thing our media points towards. When you see stories like this
you really wonder how deep the corruption goes.
I really don't want to get in the middle of this but the opening paragraph in the article:
"A BBC investigation estimates that around $23bn (£11.75bn) may have been lost, stolen or just not properly accounted for in Iraq."
I am not sure what this means. The money MAY be missing and if it is it MAY have been "lost, stolen or just not properly accounted for". Then it implies that the US government is somehow complicit since there is a "US gagging order is preventing discussion of the allegations". While there may be a gag order in effect, we really do not know why.
Then it goes on to say "To date, no major US contractor faces trial for fraud or mismanagement in Iraq". This statement, if true, only says no one has found legal grounds to bring such an action. Once again the inference is made that since Halliburton got the bid and it is a company that the VP used to "run" this company, there must be fraud. Is Halliburton truly the only company that "got to bid", or is it the only company capable of tackling the job. I really don't know and this article, like most others, fails to clarify that question. Certainly, I think there could be fraud and excess, but this article is short on real data to back this up - only siting the usual innuendo and allegations made by people on the opposite side of a political fence.
Then the article goes on to say: "He [Hazem Shalaan] and his associates siphoned an estimated $1.2bn out of the ministry". This man was charged and convicted of fraud, but fled. re we to believe this fraud somehow goes back to Bush or US policies?
This article is all over the map as far as allegations, but is woefully short on any hard data as to what money is missing and who may be responsible other than a corrupt Iraqi minister and "his associates".
Now that I have read the article, I may still wonder how deep the corruption goes, but have no better handle on it than before I read the article. The unfortunate reality is that we are constantly bombarded by spin and innuendo, supporting one political agenda or another, but very little in supportable facts.
Personally, I think all government officials, regardless of their country or their political allegiance are likely to be corrupted by the process. I also think most media reports, regardless of the country of origin, are done with a specific agenda at their core and rarely just report facts without "spin". Further, I believe governments and media organs of any country, rarely represent what the majority of the people in those countries think or feel.
"That's just my opinion, I could be wrong", Dennis Miller