By William F. Buckley Jr.: Oil-for-U.N.

Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, February 8, 2005 | By William F. Buckley Jr.

[JohnHuang2]

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A wild thought passes through my mind, which is that maybe Benon Sevan is in fact innocent. Innocent of receiving money directly from his buddy Fakhry Abdelnour, the Egyptian whose company (AMEP — African Middle East Petroleum) wanted some Iraqi chits to permit oil purchases. Benon Sevan was certainly not innocent of using his influence in behalf of his friends and of failing to blow any whistles when suspect contractors were designated to oversee the oil-for-food program, a cover-up for easing the life and enhancing the fortunes of Saddam Hussein. Click to learn more... The U.N. had evolved into a bureaucracy besotted by people who were contriving to get around the freeze on the full production and sale of Iraqi oil. There is one concrete item Paul Volcker's commission of inquiry brought out. During the period being examined, Mr. Sevan received gifts totaling $160,000 from — not Saddam, not Mr. Abdelnour, not former Iraqi Oil Minister Amir Mohammad Rashid. But from an aunt.

[Jaysun]

I don't get Buckley's point - this article is incoherent.

[Puckster]

Possibly satire directing one to the corruption that is desperately trying to avoid implication towards Koffi Annan?

[NutCrackerBoy]

If what happens is the demystification of the United Nations as a vessel of incorruptibility, that belated introduction to reality is welcome. -William F. Buckley Jr.

The sirens of The Left feed on big lies like the unquestioned benevolence of the UN. Chnages in public opinion necessary to move forward could occur when the light shines on that scandal. Reality is good.

[Jaysun]

Possibly satire directing one to the corruption that is desperately trying to avoid implication towards Koffi Annan?

Whatever his point he chose a hell of way to make it. Maybe I missed something but that article looked like the ramblings of a schizophrenic.

[AFPhys]

As much as I respect Buckley, I will state that I almost always have had problems with following his train of thought. I have long suspected that he speaks with much more effectiveness to the "nuanced liberal thinkers" than he could ever speak to me. Present your argument to me in the manner of Reagan, Bush or even pre-1992 Buchanan in order to make your point to me. That said, it is inarguable that Buckley has been one of the premiere conservatives of our lifetimes.

[Jaysun]

That said, it is inarguable that Buckley has been one of the premiere conservatives of our lifetimes.

I absolutely agree. My intent was to "bash" Buckley - I honestly couldn't figure out what in the hell he was getting at. It's refreshing to know that I'm not the only that has had that problem.

[Jaysun]

Sorry. It looks as if I've no room to criticize the man:

"I absolutely agree. My intent was wasn't to 'bash'..."