Friday, November 30, 2007

All you can eat pasta, cooked up by KHS

I noticed that a few people have jumped all over the new revelation by Karlheinz Schreiber that there was no pasta business "All this nonsense with the pasta business is five years later...."It had nothing to do with any pasta business.... It didn't simply exist...."Pasta had nothing to do with it. It was for light armoured vehicles."

Interesting because this is what he said under oath in testimony in 2004, Mr. Schreiber said under oath: "I was involved in the pasta business and enriched Durham semolina products and this is the moment when I spoke to him about Archer Daniels. And he provided me with some material on it," he said.

According to an affidavit he swore on Nov. 7, Mr. Schreiber expected the former prime minister to help establish a light armoured vehicle factory in Nova Scotia. When the deal fell through after the Liberals took power, Mr. Schreiber said -- up until yesterday -- that he then expected Mr. Mulroney to help him promote a business he incorporated in June, 2001, called Reto Restaurant Systems International Inc.

Source

Another day, another bit of sworn testimony changed to suit the current needs of KHS.

4 comments:

wilson said...

The more contradictions Schreiber throws out there, the more questions the Ethics committee will have, the longer he gets to stay in Canada.

And nothing he says in committee can be used in the Inquiry.

Big time game to suck in MPs.

surely there will come a point when Liberals will realized they are being duped.
then again...

aek said...

Schreiber and his symbiotic hyenas in opposition have the same tactical objectives, to keep the story on the front pages as long as possible and smear the reputations of their opponents as much as possible.

Schreiber's ultimate goal is delaying his possible sentence to a German prison, while the hyenas simply lust for power.

Contradictions in testimony don't matter so much, as long as they think they're making progress with their objectives.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

However, isn't this the point? Isn't the whole point that Mulroney and Schreiber made up the pasta stuff in order to cover up the true reason for the payments once they started becoming public? I get that Schreiber was lying about the pasta stuff back in the day. Isn't the bigger revelation that Mulroney is still pushing the lie?

I understand, and have for some time, that Schreiber (and more importantly Mulroney) lied about the pasta stuff. I understand this because Schreiber has rolled his eyes for years when the pasta connection came up (he got sick of sticking to the cover-story once he no longer had anything to lose) and more importantly, he's now ADMITTING it was a lie (and frankly, he laughs right out loud about it, as though he's shocked people bought such a flimsy cover story for so long... $300,000 to hand me a brochure from Archer Daniels??? SURE...).

You read this revelation and say "Ha! Either he's lying now, or he's just admitted to perjury!". I read this and say, "Wow, he just admitted that the pasta thing really WAS a cover-up, and he was once willing to perjure himself regarding it to protect Mulroney!" In other words, the only reason Mulroney isn't guilty of perjury too is that no one asked him about the payments when he was under oath! If he'd stuck to his story about the pasta business while under oath (if anyone had bothered to ask the question) then Schreiber wouldn't be the only one guilty of perjury. THAT's the revelation. The revelation is that Mulroney's lucky he only ever had to trot out the pasta cover-story in public, but never under oath!

You seem to think Schreiber admitted to perjury by mistake. I think he has Parliamentary immunity, and now he's telling the truth about committing perjury to help Mulroney (and why not admit it? He's got nothing to lose now!).

I don't understand how the fact that Schreiber now admits that the pasta business was a cover makes things worse for him but better for Mulroney. Schreiber's basically admiting that he lied under oath to protect Mulroney. Yet Mulroney still insists that this was all about pasta (to the extent he deigns to discuss the payments at all, which is almost never). Schrieber is saying "there was never any pasta business between Mulroney and I, that was all lies and obfuscation. We were trying to keep the real reasons for the payments secret". Meanwhile, Mulroney insists he was secretly paid $300,000 in cash for handing Mr. Schreiber a brochure from Archer Daniels (which was some sort of "magical" brochure that was somehow going to assist him with his pasta business). Personally, I'm more convinced by the guy who says the flimsy pasta story was a cover-up to hide the real reasons for the payments than I am by the guy who still insists this was all about pasta!

Everytime conservatives hear about how shady Schreiber is they jump to the "You can't believe this guy, he's a lying, indicted briber of public officials who probably committed perjury!!!" My reaction is "Wow, Brian Mulroney accepted $300,000 in secret cash payments from a lying, indicted briber of public officials who probably committed perjury to keep it secret!"

Ardvark said...

That really is the point, we do not know the truth and nothing the man says can be taken as being truthful as his story changes to suit his current needs.

Canadians sit back and watch the games with great disgust, and the only one really in the clear is PM Harper. The Liberals haven't figured that one out yet and will continue to look vindictive and foolish for trying to tie the current government into this old mess.