Terrorists murder Iraqi Kofigate investigator

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Bomb targeted Iraq oil row auditor

Monday, July 5, 2004 Posted: 1322 GMT (2122 HKT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The Iraqi official in charge of investigating allegations against the U.N. oil-for-food program was the target of the bomb that killed him, according to the interior ministry.

The investigation shows Ihsan Kareem, president of the Finance Ministry's audit board, was deliberately killed by an improvised explosive device attached to the underside of his car, the spokesman said without elaborating.

Kareem died the day after the explosion in early July.

His driver also died, and three other people were wounded by the blast outside Baghdad's Yarmuk hospital.

The Board of Supreme Audit has been investigating allegations that the ousted regime of Saddam Hussein siphoned billions from the oil-for-food program.

Under it, Iraq was allowed to sell limited amounts of oil to ease the burden on the public despite U.N. sanctions imposed after Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990.

questionnaire · Joined: 29 May 2003 Posts: 640

..... that is an invalid post because CNN is an unreliable right-wing corporate American media source. Independent W.H.O. inspectors reported that that Saddam's regime was one of the 'best they had seen' at distributing food-aid amongst its population. He might habe been brutal to the people who opposed him, but he looked after his own.

Even if there was a bit of fiddling going on, the Kofigate thing is a puerile distraction.

Please read Chris's thread about a 'diversity of views'.

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Q...you have your view and Ron has his. I believe that that is what diversity of views is all about.

questionnaire · Joined: 29 May 2003 Posts: 640

DT, read the other threads where 'diversity of views' has been discussed. The fact is that there is not a diversity of viuews on this board, it's full of right-wing american spammingh with lefties like me jumping in to restore the balance. I've offered to limit my posts to one a week and advertize the board around a bit - communists, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, conservatives, liberals - I want to hear it all, I'm just sick of Ron's neo-con spamming.

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Quote:
is an invalid post because CNN is an unreliable right-wing

Seting aside the above right-wing conspiracy theory, Steve; you don't believe that Ihsan Kareem, the Iraqi official in charge of investigating allegations against the U.N. oil-for-food program and president of the Finance Ministry's audit board, was deliberately killed by an improvised explosive device attached to the underside of his car?

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Quote:
you have your view and Ron has his

Actually, it's a news report, DT, not my view at all. I'm a bit far away from Iraq to cover, much less write, the news there!

questionnaire · Joined: 29 May 2003 Posts: 640

"Seting aside the above right-wing conspiracy theory, Steve; you don't believe that Ihsan Kareem, the Iraqi official in charge of investigating allegations against the U.N. oil-for-food program and president of the Finance Ministry's audit board, was deliberately killed by an improvised explosive device attached to the underside of his car?"

Ron, it's not the fact I'm disagreeing with but the interpretation, the phatic communication and the political connotation. I do not know why Kareem was killed, or how far the Coalition would go to to create a less-than-sophisticated distraction. They are in a huge mess in Iraq, and its possible that they might go to any lengths in an attempt to get out of it. It might even be true that UN staff were on the fiddle - who isn't these days, remember Enron? - but independent W.H.O. inspectors have verified that the food-aid was getting to the population, and the real issues are that without the US/UK sanctions food-aid would not have been necessary and the Coalition has illegally invaded a sovereign state for oil and political control of the Middle-East.

bbchris · Posted: Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: ...

advertize the board around a bit - communists, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, conservatives, liberals

That's a nice idea! I've invited some local people to here but the language gets a bit heavy for some of them!

questionnaire · Joined: 29 May 2003 Posts: 640

To be honest I'm one of the main culprits for using heavyweight language. I can't help it, I'm just writing in the way that I do everyday at work. I also think that the gross vulgarity we have witnessed from time to time, such as the attack on Debbie Mannas, and the gross racism displayed by a couple of members might put people off.

However, I would honestly butt out if we could advertize the board around the place and get some really diverse views that I could just read from time to time. The regulars all know each other's politics now and it's getting really boring - the rows blow up out of frustration more than anything else.

It's just a suggestion, but if I were you and Mike I would consider deleting the board and starting again with an advertizing campaign, but of course that might be a bit drastic.

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Quote:
Ron, it's not the fact I'm disagreeing with

Well, that's a good thing, since to know what's what a person must acept mutually verifiable fact. That's as opposed to basing a viewpoint on wishful thinking, agendas or sheer fantasy. In the end, fact (reality) alone - by it's very nature - remains standing, sans the spin.

Now the problem with you being upset re: from whence this news report is derived is two-fold. First, if you don't believe the terrorist incident happened as described, you could quickly and easily be able to verify it's veracity (or lack of) via other world-recognized media. Secondly, that method of "critique" is based on what we in the USA call "shooting the messenger". The phrase is derived from the days of the Greco-Roman and like emperors. If a messenger brought news that the Emperor didn't like - "we lost a major battle" or "No, the King of XYZ won't give you his daughter for a bride" - the Emperor would have a soldier run a sword through the unlucky messenger.

questionnaire · Joined: 29 May 2003 Posts: 640

1. Your tone is still patronizing. Do you honestly believe that I don't know what 'shooting the messenger' means? Your use of this metaphor here is totally inappropriate. Shooting the messenger simply means blaming the person who delivers bad news for the bad news itself. You will have to explain to everyone here how this has anything to do with my criticism of your unreliable, biased sources and their manipulative fact-selection and interpretation.

2. I did not dispute the fact. Please stop misrepresenting my posts. If only you would read the voluminous literature on ideology you would know that durable ideologies are constructed not by telling lies but carefully selecting facts that fit your point of view, and interpreting them by attaching spurious causality that also fits your point of view. Then, you buy and control media so that your version of events becomes the dominant one. You are attempting to do something similar by constantly spamming this board with pre-selected facts.

3. To expose the manipulative practices of the people who actually do this is a perfectly acceptable, indeed a very powerful, method of critique.

4. To insist that people who wish to criticize the position must accept the selected facts and the selected interpretations that have been presented as bona fide arguments is called agenda-setting, Ron, a tired way of trying to avoid critique. I do not trust your sources, their fact-selection, their interpretation or your motives in presenting them on this board, because you have consistently refused to acknowledge that the Christian free-market capitalist way of life has any flaws at all and you have never acknowledged the possibility that your current government is attempting to force this way of life on everyone else.

5. To get to the crux of the matter: the fact that the official has been murdered by persons unknown has been presented in a way that implies that he was about to spill the beans on UN corruption in food-distribution, which tacitly suggests that it is the UN and not the sanctions levelled by the USA and the UK that is to blame for millions of Iraqi deaths, including 500,000 children. Now, couldn't anyone who can't see that this might be a crude tactic engineered by the world's most powerful politics-media patrnership (using the methods described above) for shifting the blame from the USA/UK to the UN be accused of being a bit stupid?