Right wing is disappointed by the Volcker report (oil for food)

[Cocoa]

so it looks like they're going to go ad hominem on Volcker.

I look forward to hearing how Fox News handles this report, along with how Norm Coleman responds. My guess, they'll both lose their intense interest in "getting to the bottom of it" since it didn't come out the way they wanted.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalOrganizations/bg1819.cfm

<snip>

Regrettably, those expecting a hard-hitting expose of U.N. corruption and feckless leadership could well be disappointed by Volcker’s report. As Chairman Volcker stated to The New York Times, his report will produce no “smoking gun.”<5> While the IIC interim report will probably contain valuable information of considerable interest to congressional investigators, some of which may be damaging to the U.N.’s reputation, it is unlikely to paint a detailed picture of corruption and mismanagement at the highest levels of the world body.

With the possible exception of one or two officials, a whitewash of most of the U.N.’s leadership, including the Secretary-General, is a strong possibility. Indeed, there is widespread suspicion on Capitol Hill that the Volcker Committee will instead focus heavily upon the supposed role of the Security Council in overseeing the Oil-for-Food program—especially the United States, even though it is not the main charge of the inquiry.<6>

The Volcker Committee may fail to deliver an exhaustive account of U.N. failings and possible criminal activity by U.N. officials for several reasons, including a lack of investigative power and an absence of real independence from the U.N. Indeed, the five congressional investigations<7> now underway are far more likely to prove effective in uncovering the full story of the Oil-for-Food fraud that allowed the Saddam Hussein regime to enrich itself at the expense of the Iraqi people.

<snip>

In addition to the problems outlined above, the fact that Mr. Volcker’s own outlook may be influenced by past associations should be an issue of serious concern. It is vitally important that any independent inquiry into the extremely serious allegations against the United Nations over its management of the Oil-for-Food program be totally independent of the U.N. It is just as important that the person heading the inquiry be completely unbiased and objective in his approach to the organization he is investigating. For example, in the corporate world, it would be inconceivable for an independent inquiry into fraud and corruption to be headed by someone with strong ties and loyalties to the corporation being investigated.

More…

[yellowcanine]

1. I have believed all along this is a tempest in a right wing teapot - and

mostly a tactic to divert attention from the Bush failures and scandals in Iraq. Why is it that the Republicans are perfectly happy with THEIR hand-picked investigators until they start coming up with undesirable findings? (See Fisk on Whitewater, Walsh on Iran-Contra, and Hadley on Delay).

On edit - and I forgot - Fisk AND Starr on the "murder" of Vince Foster.

[AndrewNC]

2. Bingo

The exact purpose of the initial investigation was a) to discredit the United Nations; and b) to divert attention from Bush's Iraq mistakes. "The Greatest Scandal in Human History?" Hardly.

They use the same sleight of hand on the United Nations that Bush uses on terrorists:

"Either you're with us or with the terrorists." Um, what about the Dutch, who are most definitely not with the terrorists.

"With Rwanda, Oil-For-Food, etc., the UN is a useless organization that can't be trusted."

Isn't the UN more-or-less as imperfect as Congress -- something that can only be fixed with sincere participation? Isn't it only as good as its members? I mean, I disagree with Syria being put on the HUman Rights committee with us being kicked off; and the UN can't stop a war, because that's not what they do; I just think it's an easy scapegoat for the kind of Republicans who never leave the country...