Written by Phelim McAleer
Friday, 13 November 2009 17:58
WHEN Al Gore was becoming so rich it was embarrassing the New York Times finally noticed and decided to write about it.
It was also painfully obvious that Mr Gore was becoming rich through a massive conflict of interest - as a politician promoting legislation which stood to benefit him enormously. Indeed he is widely predicted to become the first climate Billionaire.
And how did the New York Times address this conflict of interest - by simply not calling it a conflict of interest.
Instead the headline stated: GORE'S DUAL ROLE IN SPOTLIGHT ADVOCATE AND INVESTOR
However it seems that conflicts of interest only exist for those who work in the fossil fuel industry.
And so we come to the headline in yesterdays NYT: U.S. Adviser to Kurds Stands to Reap Oil Profits
It was about Peter Galbraith, an American political adviser to the Kurds in Northern Iraq, who also worked for an oil company. One Iraqi politician interviewed said he was "speechless" at the dual role.
However eventually the New York Times admitted that Mr Galbraith had at all times told the Kurdish government about his business involvement in the oil industry.
Mr Galbraith's other defence sounds just like Al Gore's.
“What is true is that I undertook business activities that were entirely consistent with my long-held policy views," said Mr Galbraith.
However this was not good enough for the New York Times.
It seems that in their world Mr Gore, who make billions out of public environmental policy but won't reveal his holdings are simple "investors" with a dual role but those who make millions out of a declared interest in fossil fuels "REAP Oil Profits" that leave the NYT speechless.
Share this page on your favorite Social Websites...