Probe: Iraqi oil money estimates double

[MidasKnight]

CNN

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Saddam Hussein's regime made more than $21.3 billion in illegal revenue by subverting the U.N. oil-for-food program -- more than double previous estimates, according to congressional investigators.

 

[MidasKnight]

"Rather than giving allocations to traditional oil purchasers, Hussein gave oil allocations to foreign officials, journalists, and even terrorist entities, who then sold their allocations to the traditional oil companies in return for a sizable commission."

 

[Alistar7]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/ne...r_food_investigation_2


Zhirinovsky and other foreign officials and political figures implicated in the scandal so far ? mostly from Russia, France and China ? deny any wrongdoing.

The Iraqi government allocated 80 million barrels of oil to Zhirinovsky and his party, according to the panel, at a time when the Russian politician was backing Baghdad publicly.


The new figures on Iraq (news - web sites)'s alleged surcharges, kickbacks and oil-smuggling are based on troves of new documents obtained by the committee's investigative panel, Coleman told reporters before the hearing. The documents illustrate how Iraqi officials, foreign companies and sometimes politicians allegedly contrived to allow the Iraqi government vast illicit gains.


The findings also reflect a growing understanding by investigators of the intricate schemes Saddam used to buy support abroad for a move to lift U.N. sanctions.

 

[Alistar7]

So interesting those that continue their bleating about Bush in regards to Iraq ignore this information. Why, because it proves the point that was made before the war about the reasoning behind the lack of support in the UN, it was not based on anything other than greed and corruption at the expense of the citizens of Iraq, the same reasons the hypocritically suggested was the basis for their objections.

Looks like ALOT of people in this country and certainly in the EU were lied to and brainwaashed by their Govts, how could so many millions of people be SO DUMB?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Why, because it proves the point that was made before the war about the reasoning behind the lack of support in the UN, it was not based on anything other than greed and corruption at the expense of the citizens of Iraq....SO DUMB?

You are making the DUMB mistake of attacking motives. Even if their motives were simply greed, their arguments and official positions against the war were still accurate.

Anyway, isn't there already a thread on this?

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Why, because it proves the point that was made before the war about the reasoning behind the lack of support in the UN, it was not based on anything other than greed and corruption at the expense of the citizens of Iraq....SO DUMB?

You are making the DUMB mistake of attacking motives. Even if their motives were simply greed, their arguments and official positions against the war were still accurate.

Anyway, isn't there already a thread on this?

Their arguements and positions were not accurate, they were based on continuing the flow of money into their pockets, did they include their illegal gains in their arguements and positions? Nope....

I am not attacking their motives, just pointing out that as many suspected while it was happening these allegations had substantial merit and at least made sense when trying to determine the reasons they objected so strongly to Saddams removal.

 

[Alistar7]

But it's not DUMB for you to attack Bush's motives in regards to Iraq infohawk?

 

[Strk]

This is all France's fault.......


(well, someone was going to say it 😉)

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Strk
This is all France's fault.......


(well, someone was going to say it 😉)

The fault is squarely on the UN and those who illegaly thwarted sanctions.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Strk
This is all France's fault.......


(well, someone was going to say it 😉)

The fault is squarely on the UN and those who illegaly thwarted sanctions.

sarcasm loses its fun over the internet 🙁 sometimes......

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Strk
This is all France's fault.......


(well, someone was going to say it 😉)

The fault is squarely on the UN and those who illegaly thwarted sanctions.

sarcasm loses its fun over the internet 🙁 sometimes......

I didn't see the sarcasm in that statement as much as the truth 😉

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Their arguements and positions were not accurate, they were based on continuing the flow of money into their pockets, did they include their illegal gains in their arguements and positions? Nope.... I am not attacking their motives, just pointing out that as many suspected while it was happening these allegations had substantial merit and at least made sense when trying to determine the reasons they objected so strongly to Saddams removal.

Again, you are attacking their motives. You are saying they were doing what they were doing because of their greed, not because of their arguments. The arguments against the war are still valid and are not based on the flow of money.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Their arguements and positions were not accurate, they were based on continuing the flow of money into their pockets, did they include their illegal gains in their arguements and positions? Nope.... I am not attacking their motives, just pointing out that as many suspected while it was happening these allegations had substantial merit and at least made sense when trying to determine the reasons they objected so strongly to Saddams removal.

Again, you are attacking their motives. You are saying they were doing what they were doing because of their greed, not because of their arguments. The arguments against the war are still valid and are not based on the flow of money.

What were their arguements against the war? What was their stated concerns regarding the citizens of Iraq?

 

[Alistar7]

"Paris says international law, not commercial interests, drives its objection to war in Iraq. "



http://www.iraqcrisisbulletin....m_un_debate_may_l.html

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
What were their arguements against the war? What was their stated concerns regarding the citizens of Iraq?

This is very common knowledge. I'm sure there are some good sites on the net about it.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Alistar7
What were their arguements against the war? What was their stated concerns regarding the citizens of Iraq?

This is very common knowledge. I'm sure there are some good sites on the net about it.

So why not acknowledge their hypocrisy and the evidence that shows their TRUE motives?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

So why not acknowledge their hypocrisy and the evidence that shows their TRUE motives?

Because it's not clear that those were their motives and as I said, even if their motives were questionable, their official reasons were perfectly sound.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Alistar7

So why not acknowledge their hypocrisy and the evidence that shows their TRUE motives?

Because it's not clear that those were their motives and as I said, even if their motives were questionable, their official reasons were perfectly sound.

Just as Bush's official reasons were perfectly sound, and unlike this investigation there is NOTHING to substantiate the claims of his ulterior motives you LOVE to keep bleating about. If the corruption and those that benefited is not clear it is only because you choose to maintain your ignorance of the subject.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Alistar7

So why not acknowledge their hypocrisy and the evidence that shows their TRUE motives?

Because it's not clear that those were their motives and as I said, even if their motives were questionable, their official reasons were perfectly sound.

Just as Bush's official reasons were perfectly sound, and unlike this investigation there is NOTHING to substantiate the claims of his ulterior motives you LOVE to keep bleating about. If the corruption and those that benefited is not clear it is only because you choose to maintain your ignorance of the subject.

Bush's official reasons were not sound. They were based on the idea that Iraq had WMDs and was an imminent threat to the US. Both ended up being wrong.

 

[Alistar7]

Both were wrong, what about what's contained in my sig? Who was willing to state before the war they knew for a fact Saddam had NO WMD capabilities? Nobody, both were right on with the information available at the time that EVERYONE believed.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Both were wrong, what about what's contained in my sig? Who was willing to state before the war they knew for a fact Saddam had NO WMD capabilities? Nobody, both were right on with the information available at the time that EVERYONE believed.

People contested the WMD threat before the war and most knowledgeable people realized that Iraq was no threat to the US and especially not an imminent threat. Saddam was secular and didn't care for the al-queada types and vice versa. Bush ended up being wrong, just like you were warned.

 

[Alistar7]

Nobody was willing to state the knew Saddam had zero WMD capabilities, hence the reason sanctions were still in effect.

My sig clearly states the threat Saddam presented to the US.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

My sig clearly states the threat Saddam presented to the US.

It's just a sig. Sorry to break it for you.

 

[Alistar7]

It's a direct quote that proves you wrong, sorry to break that to you....

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
It's a direct quote that proves you wrong, sorry to break that to you....

Assuming it is right. And it doesn't show the imminent part.

In any case, I'm not interested in going over the Iraq war again. I just wanted to answer your question of why nobody cares about this scandal as much as you haters do. It's because the reasons for not having the war were still valid even IF the motives of the rest of the world was corruption (and there isn't enough evidence it is). Cheers. 🙂