Months after the Wall Street Journal, the NY Post, myriad blogs and others have been yelling and screaming about the UN Oil-for-Food Scandal, the New York Times has logged in with a lengthy analysis. I can remember only one other article of signifiance besides this on the subect from them. Claudia Rosett alone has written ten times as much, at least, than the Times.
Why? Not important enough? What could be more important in explaining the behavior of the UN and its member states vis-a-vis Iraq than this multi-billion dollar rake off? Staying behind the curve, the de facto reactionary Times doesn’t even mention Rosett’s latest speculations — that the Oil-for-Food program could actually have been financing Al Qaeda. That might have been too much for the Grey Lady, because that would virtually lay waste to their mantra of no relationship between Saddam and the Islamists. He would have been one of their financiers. Oh, well. The struggle continues, as we used to say.