I recently got an e-mail response from Senator Coleman in answer to my query as to why George Galloway's testimony had not been put up on the Subcommittee's website. I imagine that he sent the same thing to everyone that wrote to him about the Galloway testimony on CSPAN. Anyway, Coleman's e-mail was a complete rationalization of his decision to go after Galloway in the first place. I don't like to publish someone else's correspondence without their permission so I won't put up Coleman's e-mail. But my next letter to Coleman is in the usual place...
Update [2005-7-8 13:58:53 by DanielMN]: Someone requested that I post Senator Coleman's Letter and so I have done so below. Perhaps my notions of netiquette are a bit dated.
Senator Coleman,
I am a constituent and am writing once again to exercise my constitutional right to petition the government.
I recently sent you an e-mail because I was concerned that the statement made by George Galloway during a subcommittee hearing on the investigation into Irag Oil for Food corruption was not on the subcommittee's website alongside the statements of other witnesses. I later learned that the other witnesses had presented written statements and that it can take months to transcribe the oral statement of a witness. This is difficult to understand in that the video of Mr. Galloway's statement was available online within minutes and his statement was transcribed by various news agencies within hours.
In any event, I was not commenting on the content of Mr. Galloway's testimony. Your response to my inquiry, however, rationalizes the subcommittee's investigation of Mr. Galloway, listing evidence against him. That evidence appears to consist in three parts.
First, there is documentation created by the Hussein regime and documentation created by the Iraqi Oil Ministry "after the fall of the Hussein regime." This documentation has been disseminated widely and I have seen some of it myself. The entries referring to Mr. Galloway appear to be altered. The alteration seems obvious, even to me. The typeface is not the same size as the surrounding entries and the density of the entry is less than that of the surrounding entries. Surely I must be wrong about this. You would not start a Senate investigation on the basis of forged documents. Surely you had these documents examined by forensic scientists whose findings are beyond reproach. Why not call these experts to testify before the subcommittee and authenticate the documents, explaining how it is that they appear altered but actually have not been.
Second, there are statements of former regime officials. I understand that the members of the former regime are in rather desperate circumstances. They are kept in isolation by elements of the United States military, their fates unknown and unknowable. Their circumstances would seem to be the very definition of duress. It is my understanding that statements made under duress are not reliable and that these people are likely to say anything, anything at all. But perhaps my understanding of this is inaccurate and these former regime members are reliable witnesses. Why not bring them to Washington to testify before the subcommittee and substantiate their statements so that everyone can see how and why the United States Senate relies on their statements?
Third, there is apparently testimony of elements of the United States Treasury Department with regard to activity that occurred in Iraq during the former regime. As an American I want very much to believe that all parts of the Bush administration are impartial and even-handed with regard to Iraq. At the same time, it is clear that people around the world are not completely convinced that this is so. Why not bring these agents of the Treasury Department to testify before the subcommittee and substantiate their statements for all to hear?
I believe that the United States must operate in the world with the greatest of Christian virtue. We must be fair, forthright and honest, compassionate but firm. I fear that your investigation of Mr. Galloway makes the United States look petty, vindictive, and unjust and it makes you look foolish. It would be best for the United States if your investigation of Mr. Galloway were more thorough and just.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Regards,
Daniel S. Schroeder