 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sikander
At least one U.S. company is under investigation by this committee. Our involvement in this matter is limited by the fact that Hussein didn't see much advantage in trying to bribe us to change our policy. What's interresting here is that there has been little to no activity on the part of the states who were much more involved in this activity and the U.N. to investigate. Which is exactly the behavior you are complaining about in the U.S., except it's happening elsewhere in this instance. As this thread is about shafting the people of Iraq in order to get rich for your own ends while shoring up a ruthless dictator why don't you save your blame Americanisms for one of the other dozen threads active today where they are more appropriate? |
I think it is good that the Oil for Food issues are being looked into, but I have reservations about how partisan the looking seems to be. Also, every time this comes up there are some people that act like the Oil for Food problems were somehow going to let Saddam build WMDs out the wazoo and nuke the USA or something. Yes, it was a problem, but it wasn't a particularly massive problem.
I would repeat again that for most of the officials (the Russian one being the only exception I can see) there is no evidence that they ever used the voucher Saddam decided to send them. This means that the worst thing we can say for sure is that Saddam *attempted* to bribe people. Again, there is no evidence that anything Saddam did here changed government policy in any country.
A number of people need to stop blowing this out of proportion.
-Drachasor
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
You need to follow the news more closely, Oerdin. The latest news is that Kofi Annan's own son is being investigated for corruption... |
Which doesn't inherently mean he did anything wrong, and last I checked he wasn't in charge of the U.N. Additionally, that doesn't support you throwing France and Russia into the mix.
-Drachasor
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
As I have said repeatedly, Sikander, there is no evidence any policies were influenced by the Oil for Food problems. Neither you nor anyone else has provided anything to support this proposition. Indeed, there isn't even evidence that Saddam bribed officials, only that he attempted to. There were corruptions in businesses however, but those aren't government entities.
What was going on is certainly a bad thing, it isn't as bad as many are making it out to be. There are some bad companies and Iraqis suffered from this, but it wasn't anything we couldn't have fixed without a war. People trying to use Oil for Food and corruption as justifications for the war are being ridiculous.
Oh, and as for Saddam paying money to the families of suicide bombers, there is an easy way to stop that: freeze his accounts.
-Drachasor
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
The world should've gone there not two years ago, but 12 years ago. Think of the people suffering and dying because of the sanctions.... |
Occupying Iraq during the first Gulf War would have shattered the alliance. What we should have done is eliminate the Republican Guard (and we easily could have), and then helped the rebelling people acheive victory. Then we could have helped set up the new country.
-Drachasor
Last edited by Drachasor on 17-11-2004 at 21:49
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
The article Lefty linked to:
quote:
NEW YORK -- Saddam Hussein diverted money from the U.N. oil-for-food program to pay millions of dollars to families of Palestinian suicide bombers who carried out attacks on Israel, say congressional investigators who uncovered evidence of the money trail.
The former Iraqi president tapped secret bank accounts in Jordan -- where he collected bribes from foreign companies and individuals doing illicit business under the humanitarian program -- to reward the families up to $25,000 each, investigators told The Associated Press.
Documents prepared for a hearing today by the House International Relations Committee outline the new findings.
Today's hearing, however, will focus on a French bank that handled most of the money for the program. An audit by a U.S. regulatory agency of a small sample of transactions out of the $60 billion U.N. escrow account managed by BNP-Paribas has raised serious questions concerning the bank's compliance with American money-laundering laws, investigators said.
"There are indications that the bank may have been noncompliant in administering the oil-for-food program,"
committee chairman Henry Hyde, R-Ill., said. "If true, these possible banking lapses may have facilitated Saddam Hussein's manipulation and corruption of the program."
While acknowledging that U.S. regulators have raised routine issues with BNP on compliance with banking laws, a lawyer for BNP said Hyde's statement was unfair.
"No departure from any standard caused or contributed in any way to the abuse at the oil-for-food program," the bank's lead counsel, Robert S. Bennett, said. "There are simply no connections."
The humanitarian program let Iraq trade oil for food, medicine and other items. But investigators say Saddam made more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue under the program. |
More he said/she said stuff. Our government has far too much at stake here (a shot at discrediting France and the UN at once!) for me to just assume they're telling it straight, and not spinning their asses off (ditto the French bank).
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drake Tungsten
|
 |
Knee deep in alien womyn...
Oct 2001
time: 14:18
|
|
Wow, this whole UNSCAM business just keeps getting better.
quote:
Dec. 1, 2004 — Former American fugitive Marc Rich was a middleman for several of Iraq's suspect oil deals in February 2001, just one month after his pardon from President Clinton, according to oil industry shipping records obtained by ABC News.
And a U.S. criminal investigation is looking into whether Rich, as well as several other prominent oil traders, made illegal payments to Iraq in order to obtain the lucrative oil contracts.
"Without that kind of middleman, the system would not work because the major oil companies did not want to deal with Iraq because there was a mandated kickback," said human rights investigator John Fawcett.
Another broker was New York oil trader Ben Pollner, head of Taurus Oil, who investigators say handled several billion dollars worth of the transactions now under investigation.
Pollner told ABC News he paid no bribes or kickbacks to the Iraqi regime.
Rich is still living in Switzerland and unavailable for comment. |
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=295926&page=1
Wow, who would've thought Marc Rich would be involved in this? Crazy. On the bright side, maybe we'll be able to get him on some new crimes to replace the ones Clinton pardoned him for...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
 |
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999
time: 05:18
|
|
Senator Coleman weighs in
OPED WSJ - Coleman calls for Kofi Annan to Resign
quote:
Kofi Annan Must Go
By NORM COLEMAN
December 1, 2004; Page A10
It's time for U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to resign.
Over the past seven months, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which I chair, has conducted an exhaustive, bipartisan investigation into the scandal surrounding the U.N. Oil-for-Food program. That noble program was established by the U.N. to ease the suffering of the Iraqi people, then languishing under Saddam Hussein's ironfisted rule, as well as the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq by the U.N. after the first Gulf War. While sanctions were designed to instigate the removal of Saddam from power, or at least render him impotent, the Oil-for-Food program was designed to support the Iraqi people with food and other humanitarian aid under the watchful eye of the U.N.
Our Investigative Subcommittee has gathered overwhelming evidence that Saddam turned this program on its head. Rather than erode his grip on power, the program was manipulated by Saddam to line his own pockets and actually strengthen his position at the expense of the Iraqi people. At our hearing on Nov. 15, we presented evidence that Saddam accumulated more than $21 billion through abuses of the Oil-for-Food program and U.N. sanctions. We continue to amass evidence that he used the overt support of prominent members of the U.N., such as France and Russia, along with numerous foreign officials, companies and possibly even senior U.N. officials, to exploit the program to his advantage. We have obtained evidence that indicates that Saddam doled out lucrative oil allotments to foreign officials, sympathetic journalists and even one senior U.N. official, in order to undermine international support for sanctions. In addition, we are gathering evidence that Saddam gave hundreds of thousands -- maybe even millions -- of Oil-for-Food dollars to terrorists and terrorist organizations. All of this occurred under the supposedly vigilant eye of the U.N.
* * *
While many questions concerning Oil-for-Food remain unanswered, one conclusion has become abundantly clear: Kofi Annan should resign. The decision to call for his resignation does not come easily, but I have arrived at this conclusion because the most extensive fraud in the history of the U.N. occurred on his watch. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, as long as Mr. Annan remains in charge, the world will never be able to learn the full extent of the bribes, kickbacks and under-the-table payments that took place under the U.N.'s collective nose.
Mr. Annan was at the helm of the U.N. for all but a few days of the Oil-for-Food program, and he must, therefore, be held accountable for the U.N.'s utter failure to detect or stop Saddam's abuses. The consequences of the U.N.'s ineptitude cannot be overstated: Saddam was empowered to withstand the sanctions regime, remain in power, and even rebuild his military. Needless to say, he made the Iraqi people suffer even more by importing substandard food and medicine under the Oil-for-Food program and pawning it off as first-rate humanitarian aid.
Since it was never likely that the U.N. Security Council, some of whose permanent members were awash in Saddam's favors, would ever call for Saddam's removal, the U.S. and its coalition partners were forced to put troops in harm's way to oust him by force. Today, money swindled from Oil-for-Food may be funding the insurgency against coalition troops in Iraq and other terrorist activities against U.S. interests. Simply put, the troops would probably not have been placed in such danger if the U.N. had done its job in administering sanctions and Oil-for-Food.
This systemic failure of the U.N. and Oil-for-Food is exacerbated by evidence that at least one senior U.N. official -- Benon Sevan, Mr. Annan's hand-picked director of the U.N.'s Oil-for-Food oversight agency -- reportedly received bribes from Saddam. According to documents from the Iraqi oil ministry that were obtained by us, Mr. Sevan received several allotments of oil under Oil-for-Food, each of which was worth hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars.
To make matters worse, the actions of Mr. Annan's own son have been called into question. Specifically, the U.N. recently admitted that Kojo Annan received more money than previously disclosed from a Swiss company named Cotecna, which was hired by the U.N. to monitor Iraq's imports under Oil-for-Food. Recently, there are growing, albeit unproven, allegations that Kofi Annan himself not only understands his son's role in this scandal -- but that he has been less than forthcoming in what he knew, and when he knew it.
As a former prosecutor, I believe in the presumption of innocence. Such revelations, however, cast a dark cloud over Mr. Annan's ability to address the U.N.'s quagmire. Mr. Annan has named the esteemed Paul Volcker to investigate Oil-for-Food-related allegations, but the latter's team is severely hamstrung in its efforts. His panel has no authority to compel the production of documents or testimony from anyone outside the U.N. Nor does it possess the power to punish those who fabricate information, alter evidence or omit material facts. It must rely entirely on the goodwill of the very people and entities it is investigating. We must also recognize that Mr. Volcker's effort is wholly funded by the U.N., at Mr. Annan's control. Moreover, Mr. Volcker must issue his final report directly to the secretary general, who will then decide what, if anything, is released to the public.
Therefore, while I have faith in Mr. Volcker's integrity and abilities, it is clear the U.N. simply cannot root out its own corruption while Mr. Annan is in charge: To get to the bottom of the murk, it's clear that there needs to be a change at the top. In addition, a scandal of this magnitude requires a truly independent examination to ensure complete transparency, and to restore the credibility of the U.N. To that end, I reiterate our request for access to internal U.N. documents, and for access to U.N. personnel who were involved in the Oil-for-Food program.
All of this adds up to one conclusion: It's time for Kofi Annan to step down. The massive scope of this debacle demands nothing less. If this widespread corruption had occurred in any legitimate organization around the world, its CEO would have been ousted long ago, in disgrace. Why is the U.N. different?
Sen. Coleman is chairman of the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ogie Oglethorpe
|
|
Marietta, GA
Dec 1999
time: 05:18
|
|
Agreed. Point of the matter was I wasn't fully convinced of the proposed rationale for war being WMD. That being said I am of the opinion voiced by Colin Powell, "You broke it, you bought it."
OTOH it does provide rationale as to reluctance of foreign states to help inititiate regime change as well as desire for continuing status quo.
Last edited by Ogie Oglethorpe on 02-12-2004 at 19:40
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-11-2004 19:10
). Because like I said before, given the vested interest our government (particularly the Republicans in it) has in discrediting the UN and countries who opposed the war, in the absence of documented proof of UN complicity and/or gross negligence, I'm going to assume this is exaggeration/spin for political purposes.
|