Posted on 12/07/2004 8:58:14 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
Prompted by Senator Norm Coleman's call for UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to resign over the swindling of the UN Oil for Food program with Iraq, the broadcast networks on Wednesday night and Thursday morning finally touched on a building scandal long covered by FNC. But interviewing Coleman on Thursday's Today, Katie Couric treated him as the one with a position in need of defense. She told him: "It's been reported that three thousand UN staff members signed an email saying the accusations against the United Nations were quote, 'made without full knowledge of the facts.'" And she suggested a nefarious motivation: "Is your call for...Secretary General's resignation politically motivated in any way and is this payback for the fact that Kofi Annan criticized the war in Iraq before the election?" FoxNews.com posted a piece, by the MRC’s Tim Graham, about the lack of interest, in the scandal, by the broadcast networks.
# The MRC's Geoff Dickens took down Couric's questions, on the December 2 Today, to Republican Senator Norm Coleman, who appeared from St. Paul. She set up the session: "On Close Up this morning United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan under fire. Republican Senator Norm Coleman from Minnesota is calling on him to resign because of what he calls widespread corruption in the UN-monitored oil for food program in Iraq. Senator Coleman good morning to you."
Couric's mostly antagonistic questions:
-- "Why do you think it's necessary or why have or why do you feel it's been necessary for you to come forward and call for Kofi Annan's resignation?"
-- "And in fact in your editorial in the Wall Street Journal Senator you mention quote, 'bribes, kickbacks and under-the-table payments that took place under the UN's collective nose.' As head of the Senate committee investigating the scandal what, specifically, did you find that, that Kofi Annan or other officials at the UN did or didn't do that has prompted you to call for his resignation?"
-- "But Senator Coleman isn't the key word you use, 'accuse?' Kofi Annan did appoint Paul Volker the former chairman of the Federal Reserve to investigate this. Why not wait until Paul Volker has completed his investigation?"
-- "I know that you've said that you believe because Saddam Hussein wasn't carefully monitored in terms of what he was doing with this oil for food program money that he was never held accountable by the United Nations that he remained financially strong and powerful and that the United States had no choice but to invade Iraq. Are you indirectly blaming Kofi Annan and the United Nations for the war in Iraq?" Coleman: Read Dulfer's report, Hussein strengthened, some nations benefitted from abuse, UN Security Council never would have acted.
-- "Senator Coleman why isn't the White House and the State Department supporting your call for this resignation?"
Coleman: They are supporting getting to bottom of this, but need UN for Iraqi election.
-- "At the same, at the same time Senator it's been reported that three thousand UN staff members signed an email saying the accusations against the United Nations were quote, 'made without full knowledge of the facts.' What's your response to that?"
Coleman: No one disputes billions ripped off, question is how high up did fraud go in UN.
-- "Senator we only have a few seconds left but at least one Washington official said this administration has been reluctant to defend Kofi Annan because there is some quote, 'irritation with Annan over Iraq.' Is your call for the Secretary's, Secretary General's resignation politically motivated in any way and is this payback for the fact that Kofi Annan criticized the war in Iraq before the election?"
Coleman: "Absolutely not."
# FoxNews.com has posted an analysis piece by the MRC's Tim Graham, "Oil-for-Food Blackout," which documented the lack of interest, by the broadcast networks, in the scandal. To read it online, on the “Fox Fan” page: www.foxnews.com
A reprint of the December 2 article:
The national media usually presents themselves as dedicated debunkers of every item of political pomposity, ready to milk the ratings out of exposing every sacred cow. But that has never been true of its coverage of the U.N., which represents for liberals the deeply idealistic notion of a harmonic convergence of governments, united to saving the world for humanitarian ends. Some news media may attempt to force the unfolding reality that the U.N. is deeply corrupt, but that would not include America’s liberal media elite.
In April, September and November, investigative reports revealed an increasingly massive scandal, involving billions of dollars (now estimated at over $20 billion), Saddam Hussein was able to steal from under the nose of the U.N. officials managing the Oil-for-Food program. This might seem like a big news story in an election year in which John Kerry’s stump speech constantly pounded on the need for greater multilateralism and greater American deference to the wishes of the U.N. bureaucracy. So how many stories did the Big Three networks air from January 1 to November 2? NBC was the leader, with three stories. ABC had one, on April 21, the day the U.N. announced its own internal probe into the scandal. CBS did not air one story.
Despite nine ongoing probes, the network watchdogs barked after anti-Bush angles. ABC, CBS, and NBC combined for more than 75 stories on George W. Bush's National Guard service, more than 50 stories on "skyrocketing" gasoline prices, and hundreds on prison abuse at Abu Ghraib. After liberal media stars denounced American allies as "the coalition of the bribed," where were they on the U.N.'s bribery scam?
Unfortunately, that same pattern continued after the election, even as Congress spoke out and held hearings. On November 30, CBS did its first story, a strange report which began with Dan Rather introducing the Oil-for-Food fiasco as an "alleged scandal." Is Dan trying to say that Saddam bilking the U.N. for billions should be seen as an acceptable method of international business?
Some news outlets, from the Wall Street Journal to Fox News, have taken the story more seriously and dug in deeply. But they have been dismissed by other journalists as partisan, eager to make trouble for the U.N. Shouldn’t so-called hard-bitten journalistic debunkers who revere the ideal of a functional U.N. be the most outraged by a corrupt bureaucracy that mocks the ideal?
QUICK!!!
Time for an emergency colonoscopy to locate Couric's brain!!
The U.N. is a dying institution and airheads like little Couric will not be able to put life back into it.
This twit should take a really perky jump off a bridge. Perhaps then she'll keep her idiotic opinions to herself.
We expect and less from "Katia Korosiv"
What part of incompetence, graft and corruption don't you understand?
Don't hold your breath, folks. The Media won't let this scandal come to the surface because it doesn't hurt Bush ... it helps him.
Its clear that liberals have a knee-jerk reaction to defend the UN or anything else anti-American. I have watched scores of liberal pundits, talking heads, and media outlets like the NY Times defend the Annan and the UN corruption. Its sickening. If Annan were a head of a corporation there would have already been calls for his resignation.
What the hell is wrong with this picture? Liberals criticising conservatives is considered free speech, but conservatives criticising failed leaders is considered "payback".
The MSM's treatment (or lack thereof) of the oil-for-food scandal will serve for years as Exhibit "A" in our allegations of media bias. It is absolutely stunning the way the major networks have buried this story. Any allegation about Halliburton becomes the Top Story, but this $20 billion scandal is passed over in virtual silence.
On the contrary, if Annan was the head of a corporation the global socialist media would have seen to it that he would have been hanged during Tolerance Week at Berkeley.
That's the thing. Liberals can't learn anything of import. They can only "learn" to be more dishonest and manipulative.
They're ideological fanatics.
"Couric: Criticism of Annan "Payback" for Him Opposing Iraq War?"
Maybe it's payback for being incompetent and corrupt.
Is Katie Kook still on the air?
The problem with the perky one is that she is just as dumb as a box of rocks.
With such lofty and vague goals in mind, the media can always congratulate the UN for "making an effort."
It doesn't matter how unsuccessful the UN actually is at achieving anything, as long as the UN declares it is heading along the "politically correct" path.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.