# News Clinton is PO’d

1. Oct 30, 2005

### GENIERE

Clinton pardoned Marc Rich after he received $450,000 donation to his library. Now it is known that Rich received more than$3,000,000 from Saddam via the UN-Iraq kickback scheme.

“That SOB gets 3 mil and I get a paltry 450k. Hillary only got $70,000 that’s peanuts for all she’s put out with.” 2. Oct 30, 2005 ### Pengwuino Well thats just.... source-o-rific. Sourcetastic. Sourcemobile Whats your source. 3. Oct 30, 2005 ### Smurf I didn't think Hillary put out. I mean, that's why Billy was cheatin wasn't it? 4. Oct 30, 2005 ### Echo 6 Sierra His appearance fees have declined sharply. He was in Texas yesterday signing books at the book festival for$130 a chair. It was a small room. The chef from Queer Eye had a bigger audience as did Kinky Friedman...and just about every other author did as well. Sources?!...we don't know no stinking sources.

5. Oct 30, 2005

### TheStatutoryApe

Relatively detailed background...
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21595
And as of today...
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/27/oil.food.report/
It's Called http://www.GOOGLE.COM People!!!
Ofcourse it's always better if the poster supplies links, at the very least.:grumpy:

6. Oct 30, 2005

### edward

There is plenty of blame to spread on the oil for food scandal. over 2000 companies were involved in the kickbacks. Mark Rich was just one of many.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0518/p03s01-usfp.html

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=295926&page=1

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-10-21-oil-for-food_x.htm

Last edited: Oct 30, 2005
7. Oct 30, 2005

### Pengwuino

Its called being lazy!

8. Oct 31, 2005

### Moonbear

Staff Emeritus
First, when you make claims like this, you need to cite sources. Second, please clarify what it is you wish to discuss about this.

9. Oct 31, 2005

### Pengwuino

That was a nice job of blaming America for everything when everyone else was actually to blame. No wonder theres so much Anti-Americanism... no one seems to want to tell the truth. I wonder why no Democrats are calling for France or Russia to be kicked out of the UN but the hell if they wouldn't want the US kicked out. Double standard or just ignorance? You decide.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/27/i...=5fc1b7a9d673c5a8&ei=5009&partner=MSN_NYTHOME

10. Oct 31, 2005

### Gokul43201

Staff Emeritus
Just to clarify what looks like an incorrect piece of "supporting evidence".

To say that France and Russia had the largest numbers of companies involved in the program is not the same as saying they had the largest number of companies involved in the fraud.

The quoted statement thus has no relevance to the argument.

11. Oct 31, 2005

### Anttech

Yes it was bad Pengwuino, but how can you say he is diverting the truth, when in fact you are ??

Double standards on your half

Why do you continue to troll, in every thread?

12. Oct 31, 2005

### Mercator

Geniere, finally we find each other. What was known in the industry from the beginning now slowly begins to trickle down. EVERYBODY in this business knew Marc Rich's involvement in the smuggling of Iraqi oil to the US. He was not just "one of many". He was the kingpin. He was the guy who assured that most of the smuggled oil went to the US, through all kinds of set-ups made to look like it were others, FRench, Swiss, Germans, you name it. And if I say "he" I mean of course his company by the same name. I have posted this I guess two years ago on this and other boards. At that time I was called a conspiracy theorist, just because I know what is going on in the energy world. My desillusion started with Clinton pardoning a crook like Marc Rich. Where does yours start?

13. Nov 1, 2005

### GENIERE

I don't think I ever became disillusioned. I observed that people endeavor to satisfy their needs whether for money, power, or whatever. Corporations and governments are extensions of their human components and acquire all the human qualities, the good and the bad. Of course words like good, bad, fair, humane have a dictionary meaning, but these abstract terms are not really definable. My definition of `fair’ may be similar to that of Russ-Water’s, but polar to that of Pattylou.

A corporation, a government, and a society will evolve a personality. I expect each to act in a manner I consider to be fair per my definition. I expect each will occasionally fail miserably and each will have brilliant successes. I’m never surprised, sometimes I’m saddened, and sometimes I’m elated. I expect corporate greed, I am quite sure it is a necessary element of success. I expect the greed to be well tempered by a good dose of fairness.

..

14. Nov 1, 2005

### Anttech

Perhaps you would like to outline your definition of "fair" then?

15. Nov 2, 2005

### GENIERE

16. Nov 2, 2005

### Mercator

Ok, not a lady, but. Fairness is the opposite of greed, it is a measured response to any wrongdoing and takes different forms in different situations. My favourite definition is "The attitude of doing just for all."

An example:

Clinton lied about a jowblob, so it would only be fair that his wife would be angry, sue him, divorce him or forgive him, up to her and NOBODY else.
(And the fact that he made other blunders as a president has nothing to do with this, that's also fairness)

Bush lied so he could invade a country. His actions are the direct cause of thousands of deaths and he made the whole world a less safe place. It would be fair that the whole world would be angry at him, impeach him, sue him etc...

17. Nov 2, 2005

### Anttech

You think I am a woman? .. :rofl:
Anyway, I am not the one who said:
For your post to be of any use you should define what you mean by "fair"