Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GST who wrote (157358)	5/19/2003 7:35:38 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Respond to of 164684

Finding fault with execution is not an indictment of policy (i.e. regime change), even if he hadn't distorted the truth to do so. But it was recently reported that the administration's proposed Security Council resolution would give the United States and our coalition partners control over the Iraqi oil industry and oil revenues during the transition to self-government, a period that may well last a number of years. The administration has apparently decided to establish an international audit board like the one I recommended - but without any real authority. Instead, authority over Iraqi oil rests with the United States. An "oversight board" or "audit board" as he says he recommended has, by definition, no authority to manage anything - they exist to oversee and audit those who do manage. If this board actually managed the oil and money and reconstruction contracts, then they couldn't possibly fulfill their oversight and audit responsibilities credibly. It is a gross distortion of facts to suggest that coalition administration is either inconsistent with his vaguely defined "international" board or represents a diversion of oil proceeds away from reconstruction. The administration has said all along that all oil revenues will remain the property of the Iraqi people, to be used in reconstruction projects or services for the Iraqi people. He's playing campaign politics by casting vague aspersions about failures and impropriety, but without any specifics that might allow him to be pinned down and proven wrong. Sounds like he'll get your vote - you argue just alike.