Remember earlier this month when the Cole commission revealed that AWB did a round of Canberra briefings, which included Alexander Downer and DFAT officials, to warn about the findings of the then pending Volcker inquiry? On a memo passed on to Downer and Mark Vaile, Dolly made a handwritten note: “Spoke to them myself: have to take it as it comes but I’m more relaxed than they are”. In case you’re getting confused, this note was made about a year and a half after Dolly had been told that “all contracts being sold to Iraq in this period had kickbacks of between 10 and 19 per cent attached to them”, which he had then found “worries me. How are AWB prices set and who set them? I wanna know about this.”
What had changed in a year and a half? Why had Dolly become so relaxed? Notes released today by Cole from an AWB report-back on the earlier meetings show that the government thought itself “untouchable” over the oil-for-food scandal. AWB’s former managing director Lindberg reportedly said the government “feels untouchable on this because the US Government is not going to criticise the Australian Government.” This ‘with fear and favour’ policy is an extraordinarily partisan way for a government to operate; as if to say that ‘we won’t be touched by the kickbacks to Saddam, because we have a protection racket going whereby we can rely on political kickbacks from the US’. It was Emerson who said that “people seem not to see that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character.” Some time in the future, we can look forward to the release of the official Howardian “enemies list”. In the meantime, be careful what you say on the phone.
CS
You keep referring to the Government. We already know the “Government” knew about it and there is nothing new about that.
Just who in “Government” are you talking about? Yes, of course we have seen allegations from the AWB shop that the “Government” “knew”. However these are simply allegations without foundation at the moment. I would suggest you wait until the Cole findings before you too get into the allegation business.
By the way, the story has a dead cat bounce to it in the wider electorate looking more and more that it’s turning into another Tampa. Let’s see Labor run with this “policy” nest year.
The real story here is the total and utter failure of the Left’s sacred belief that sanctions would have worked with Iraq. This and the UN mess is the real story.
I have also noticed (and correct me if I am wrong) that no one who has attempted to plaster the Government prior to the findings has even asked that the guy who sat at the top of the table wearing his bib while collecting 1 ½% transaction fee be fired immediately. Excuse me while I cough as I attempt to write his name. He goes by the name of Kofi. Recall if anyone on your side has even suggested the guy get the axe?
The only reputable paper of that has asked he be sacked was the the Editorial Deptartemt of the Wall Street Journal
Perhaps JC knows more about some RWDB illogic meme than I, but how exactly is Kofi Annan responsbile for the (in)actions OF THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT?
Sorry for shouting.
Because, Kim, if we weren’t fucking around with sanctions, not realizing how useless they are the AWB guys wouldn’t have been paying bribes. That’s why.
We originally had full blown sanctions, then changed to the half pregnat variety.
Have you seen anyone other than Right Wingers suggesting that Kofi ought have been fired. I haven’t! However the Aussie swarm wants the see blood dripping from face of the Government. Excuse me while I cough.
So, JC, you’re saying we never would have been tempted to sell stuff to Saddam if we’d invaded earlier? That’s the best I can make of your comment. Which still doesn’t present us in a very good light, I’m afraid.
Seems to me that blaming Kofi Annan for the sanctions broken by AWB is much like trying to put down a full house or a straight in a game of blackjack. The quality of the hand isn’t the point; AWB knew the rules and ignored them.
</homely card-playing metaphor>
Liam
Why is it easy to guess you can’t see the link between sanction, sanction busting, demnading the Government’s blood and keeping quiet about Kofi. There’s a limit to afirmative action, you know.
Why can I, JC, hear the derechistas once again futilely blaming somebody else for criminal activities, and trying to excuse corruption through social context? Just what moral argument is there ever for bribery within capitalism?
Whatever happened to the old saw do the crime, do the time?
Just a side note: I think it’s significant that Howard is now referring awkward questions about DFAT memos to Dolly. You’ll justr hae to ask him [read: im not assocaiting myself with DFAT for the foreseeable future]
JC, What astounds me in the failure of the Right to admit that the complete absence of WMDs might mean those cheese-eating, surrender - monkey sanctions were in fact working.
And what was clown Blair going on about today?? ‘Fighting terrorism’ in Iraq? wtf? The only links between terrorism and Iraq is that it became a Mecca for extemist whackos 10 minutes after the COW invasion. And they’re only some 10% of the insurgency.
Is anyone still clapping these tired old lines?
Liam
Unlike you I am not prepared to make any observation until the Cole inquiry presents its findings.
We have already seen the UN audit. Never saw you or any of your fellow bloggers here calling for Kofi’s scalp? Why?
Lefty says
JC, What astounds me in the failure of the Right to admit that the complete absence of WMDs might mean those cheese-eating, surrender - monkey sanctions were in fact working.
Me
Lefty E. Your a smart guy. I know you are. Could you please say that with a straight face. Please! Explain to the audience here how exactly were the sanctions working. Are you saying that it was ok for Kofi’s son, Russia, France, the AWB should have paid out mopre money the Saddam. is that what you are saying?
LE
In case you missed it. Iraqi documents being read prove Saddams intel unit had direct links to Bin Ladin. Let’s not even mention Ubu Nidal was a Baghdad resident until Saddam thought he was too much of an embarrassment had got someone to put a bullet through the prick’s head. Ubu Nidal was the nice guy who chucked the wheel chair bound guy off the cruize ship in the 80’s. Recall?
If I were you, stay with the WMD’s for a while longer at least until further evidence comes out from these papers that haven’t yet been read.
Well, I’m still coming to grips. Let me try this again. The possibility looms that the Australian government, or at least Dolly Downer, expected the US to cover for any Australian government illegality, as a quid pro quo for war-supporting favours rendered. Realpolitik my arse. This is the authentic sound of a vassal, appealing for protection in exchange for loyalty. The AWB scandal-fiasco is an example of the follies you fall into, when you forget that the sovereign believes in self-interest.
As evidenced by how our farmers got screwed in the US-Aus FTA. Being “our great ally” got something like some concessions to Australian beef in 18 years, and then only under certain market conditions.
I read somewhere on the weekend that it was quantified as worth $600 to each producer, and one farmer said “in other words, half a cow”.
Such are the rewards the metropole doles out to its slavish sycophants.
Shorter JC: I’ll say anything about this issue except the things I don’t want to hear said.
In this respect Nabs can you demonstrate that you are any different than JC?
Just asking?
In this respect GregM can you demonstrate that I behave like JC?
*elevator muzak…elevator muzak…elevator muzak…elevator muzak…*
Now you’re discovering GregM how cheap shots get really valued in the blog marketplace of pointed one-liners.
JC, I for one think that Kofi should go for the same reason Downer should. You’ve got to make it perfectly clear that if you are the minister, UN General secretary etc responsible for the whole thing then you’ve got to go when a whopping big scandal occurs under your nose and you did nothing to stop it. It is incompetence.
Both of them should have the good grace to resign.
JC is just cheesed off beause the Volcker enquiry caught not only those those UN crooks Kofi and mates but also some they weren’t supposed to.
Nabs
You seem unusually angry these days. Aren’t you getting your monthly allowance these days?
Nabs solution…. vapid, vapid, vapid…….vapid.
JC
‘cos what I wilfully can’t see can never hurt my ideological predelictions and ‘cos I want to see Kofi punished before anybody (if ever) else .
Does anyone else think that the mantra “Labor shouldn’t judge anything untill Cole hands down his report” is more than a little lame given that the terms of reference of the inquiry forbid Cole from handing down adverse findings about the government’s role? Cole can investigate the role of the government but can’t include it in his report. So “waiting for the report” is a fairly redundant activity unless the terms of reference are expanded.
Indeed Mick, it is a silly statement all round. Its net purpose is to buy time till the heat goes off.
And people, let’s not forget Cole, J is something of an LNP favourite - headed up the Building Industry Commission which was most interested in union activities, rather less so in dodgy building industry practices.
Cole strikes me as reliable old school, caught in a shocker. I expect him to be “sound”, as Sir Humphrey would say. “You mean bent?” replies Hacker. “Yes, err, no” says Humphrey, in faux-high dungeon. Yet, and yet … remember Sir John K.
One observation - as John Quiggin implicitly observed, the response of RWDB bloggers - “wait til the report” is exactly the same spin that the government is pushing.
If we were to go down the reverse route, I reckon Ruddy could learn a thing from John’s logical de(con)struction of right wing piffle.
And the comeback in blog question time from the RWDB benches:
!!!
Ok, I’ll stop now. Instructive thread at Quiggin’s place. Go read if you like.
Sorry, I can’t resist - it’s a vast RWDB conspiracy. C.L. challenges Quiggin to “provide evidence that you’ve ever called for the resignation of Kofi Annan”.
Can anyone provide any evidence whatsoever that any supporters of Bush/Howard have any original arguments to make or are they just bots who repeat ad nauseam and regardless of the context the current PR/spin/crap talking points of their masters?
Just askin…
Heh. Currency, energetically defending the indefensible.
Pure comedy gold over at the Quiggers’…
CL
“I don’t speak for Andrew Bolt, the columnist for whom leftists appear to have some kind of erotic fixation.”
It’s going to take a while to get that bit of projection out of my head. Ewww