WEASEL ALERT - UN "OIL-FOR-FOOLS" SCAM - Audits show rampant Bilking

[burnedout]

"It's time to take a serious look at the U.N.'s oil-for-food program."

[...]

"One of the most eye-catching names on the list is easy to miss as it's the sole entry under a country one would not normally associate with Iraq--Panama. The entry says: "Mr. Sevan." That's the same name as that of the U.N. Assistant Secretary-General Benon V. Sevan, a Cyprus-born, New York-educated career U.N. officer who was tapped by Kofi Annan in October 1997 to run the oil-for-food program."

[...]

OP from <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/.../?id=110004667">The Wall Street Journal</a>

Nice to see this topic finally getting some attention.

Update 8/26/2004: Treasury Department going after banks for money laundering

Update 12/05/04: More nepotism

 

[CADsortaGUY]

How much attention do you think it'll get here?
How about the rest of the press?

I know how I'd bet

CkG

 

[EagleKeeper]

But it is from the Wall Street Journal

Also, someone has to cover their expenses to ensure that the funds get to the proper authorities so people will get food.


/end sarcasm

 

[Zephyr106]

Must be the global Liberal conspiracy. The conservative man is an oppressed freedom fighter.

Zephyr

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

When I brought up the accounts of the oil-for-food-and-money-for-the-UN-coffers program, I was a troll Perhaps one day, like you, sir, people will see things more clearly and realize that this program was a scam...not helping the Iraqi people as much as that other country I can't talk about.

 

[sandorski]

Certainly should be investigated.

 

[Strk]

I wonder if some of Mr. Putin's actions against several tycoons had anything to do with their(the tycoons) dealings with Iraq. It would be kind of interesting to know.(if you ever study Mr. Putin, one thing is certain, a lot of what he does makes no sense)

 

[tcsenter]

When I brought up the accounts of the oil-for-food-and-money-for-the-UN-coffers program, I was a troll Perhaps one day, like you, sir, people will see things more clearly and realize that this program was a scam...not helping the Iraqi people as much as that other country I can't talk about.

You're more optimistic than I. Consider whom you're dealing with.

It has been widely reported for more than five years that Hussein was overtly buying influence in the UN Security Council.

Even after it was revealed without dispute that France and Russia had substantial financial interests in the continued operation of the Oil-for-Food program indefinitely, and even greater interests in the continued existance of the Hussein regime (TotalFinaElf and Lukoil), with zero interest in seeing this lucrative status quo come to an end, it was of course all Bush's fault for failing to get the UN's blessing for war or build a larger coalition.

It would be like expecting a member of Congress to build support among officials in NEVADA for an effort to make gambling illegal. I'm sure that the failure to secure such support would reflect entirely upon that member of Congress and not the sheer lunacy of the expectation. lol!

Even more astounding, our resident US-haters actually "spun" these facts, which they themselves did not dispute, not as evidence that the United Nations Security Council had been compromised, or that opposition to the US and Britain within the UNSC was motivated purely by greed and not by principle, but evidence that the United States and Britain wanted Iraq's oil.

IOW, it was A-OK with them that the United Nations was being used to do the bidding of a murderous tyrant while millions of Iraqis suffered in the extreme - all for oil - as long as it wasn't the US and Britain getting the oil.

Wow. That puts things into perspective.

Not surprisingly, these are usually the same folks who constantly accuse the US of arming Iraq (with Russian and French hardware) and actively supporting the rise of the Hussein regime.

Where else on earth would you find a single person, let alone thousands, who believe the US makes Russian tanks and French air defense installations? Only in America....

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Certainly should be investigated.

does everything require an incestigation these days? we all can see this was a shady deal. we all can see who was involved. theres nothing left to investigate, just a whole lot of finger pointing and name calling to be done

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
You're more optimistic than I. Consider whom you're dealing with.

It has been widely reported for more than five years that Hussein was overtly buying influence in the UN Security Council.

Even after it was revealed without dispute that France and Russia had substantial financial interests in the continued operation of the Oil-for-Food program indefinitely, and even greater interests in the continued existance of the Hussein regime (TotalFinaElf and Lukoil), with zero interest in seeing this lucrative status quo come to an end, it was of course all Bush's fault for failing to get the UN's blessing for war or build a larger coalition.

It would be like expecting a member of Congress to build support among officials in NEVADA for an effort to make gambling illegal. I'm sure that the failure to secure such support would reflect entirely upon that member of Congress and not the sheer lunacy of the expectation. lol!

Even more astounding, our resident US-haters actually "spun" these facts, which they themselves did not dispute, not as evidence that the United Nations Security Council had been compromised, or that opposition to the US and Britain within the UNSC was motivated purely by greed and not by principle, but evidence that the United States and Britain wanted Iraq's oil.

IOW, it was A-OK with them that the United Nations was being used to do the bidding of a murderous tyrant while millions of Iraqis suffered in the extreme - all for oil - as long as it wasn't the US and Britain getting the oil.

Wow. That puts things into perspective.

Not surprisingly, these are usually the same folks who constantly accuse the US of arming Iraq (with Russian and French hardware) and actively supporting the rise of the Hussein regime.

Where else on earth would you find a single person, let alone thousands, who believe the US makes Russian tanks and French air defense installations? Only in America....

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Your transparent hypocrisy is bad enough, suggesting Bush and his minions act only out of noble motives while all the countries who opposed him acted out of greed and crass commercial interests. The real farce is the way you conveniently ignore the other 100 or so countries who also opposed the war but were not participants in your global conspiracy with Hussein. I suppose they just wanted to make Bush look bad because they are so jealous of his charm and wit.

Why don't you get a job and stop polluting P&N with your hateful apologist tripe?

 

[tcsenter]

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

100 or so? I call BS.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

100 or so? I call BS.

I said "100 or so". If you have a more accurate number, I'll be happy to adopt it. Whatever the exact number may be, it is irrelevant to the point.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

100 or so? I call BS.

Yup, should be 150 or so.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

100 or so? I call BS.

Yup, should be 150 or so.

List them off and provide links.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: charrison
List them off and provide links.

With all due respect, you appear to be trying to divert the thread from the issue at hand. Tcsenter makes the absurd suggestion that the reason the other countries opposed the war is due to their financial ties to Iraq. He blissfully ignores the fact that scores of countries have no apparent financial ties, yet opposed the invasion anyway. It is immaterial if the exact number is 50, or 100, or 150.

He aslo made several other bogus claims and slurs that I've challenged him to substantiate.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: charrison
List them off and provide links.

With all due respect, you appear to be trying to divert the thread from the issue at hand. Tcsenter makes the absurd suggestion that the reason the other countries opposed the war is due to their financial ties to Iraq. He blissfully ignores the fact that scores of countries have no apparent financial ties, yet opposed the invasion anyway. It is immaterial if the exact number is 50, or 100, or 150.

He aslo made several other bogus claims and slurs that I've challenged him to substantiate.

I think someone else has made an absurd claim as well.

 

[tcsenter]

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

I wish the archives here didn't disappear into some wretched unrecoverable abyss, I'm beginning to tire of having to re-do hours of research to satisfy those who demand proof the earth is round.

I claimed "It has been widely reported for more than five years that Hussein was overtly buying influence in the UN Security Council."

For partial support of this, one need look no further than the very article which served as the impetus for this thread and linked at the top. Apparently you failed to read it. I don't know if that is because you haven't quite mastered the mouse-click or if there is more malignant reason.

What claim are you demanding I prove? That Iraq was buying influence among the UNSC? That France and Russia had significant financial stakes in the Hussein regime? My GOD! What cave have you been hiding in for the last several years?

 

[FrodoB]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

Pull your head out of the sand. The main opposition to this war was financially benefiting from the oil for food program, the UN is corrupt, and the world is a MUCH better place without Saddam. Perhaps you're one of the millions in this country that are easily and consisently brainwashed by the liberal media. The facts about the corruption in the oil for food program have been known for YEARS. Maybe if you expanded your horizons past the self admitted biased CNN and all the other liberal mainstream media sources, you'd have a better understanding of the world.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: FrodoB

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

What a crock. Typical attacks on those who disagree with you and your boy in the White House. Can you support these claims, or should we save time and dismiss them out of hand as more of your dishonest nonsense?

Another content free rebuttal by Bowfinger, completely void of any actual counter to a single word I've said outside of the substantive equivalent of "What a crock. You're stupid."

Wow! It'll take me forever to address those concise and well-reasoned points! Maybe I'll hand this one off to someone possessing a commensurate level of intellect - my five year-old nephew.

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

2. Please explain why 100 or so countries besides France, Germany, and Russia also opposed Bush's adventure in Iraq. What was their payola in your vast, pro-Hussein conspiracy?

3. Is it "due time" yet?

I won't wait up while you evade these "concise and well-reasoned points" again.

Pull your head out of the sand. The main opposition to this war was financially benefiting from the oil for food program, the UN is corrupt, and the world is a MUCH better place without Saddam. Perhaps you're one of the millions in this country that are easily and consisently brainwashed by the liberal media. The facts about the corruption in the oil for food program have been known for YEARS. Maybe if you expanded your horizons past the self admitted biased CNN and all the other liberal mainstream media sources, you'd have a better understanding of the world.

Blah, blah, blah. Feel better? More ad homs and red herrings. Read #2. Can you answer that question or not? If not, buh bye.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

I wish the archives here didn't disappear into some wretched unrecoverable abyss, I'm beginning to tire of having to re-do hours of research to satisfy those who demand proof the earth is round.

I claimed "It has been widely reported for more than five years that Hussein was overtly buying influence in the UN Security Council."

For partial support of this, one need look no further than the very article which served as the impetus for this thread and linked at the top. Apparently you failed to read it. I don't know if that is because you haven't quite mastered the mouse-click or if there is more malignant reason.

What claim are you demanding I prove? That Iraq was buying influence among the UNSC? That France and Russia had significant financial stakes in the Hussein regime? My GOD! What cave have you been hiding in for the last several years?

I note that you continue to ignore #2 (though it is obvious why you do). You also ignored #3, but your claim in that arena was just as bogus as #2. I'm sure you will make more empty promises to respond later ... and promptly disappear again.

I will give you your list in my next post.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Sorry if the seven whole sentences in my previous post were too challenging for you to parse. I'll make it easier for you:

1. Can you back up your claims or not? It's easy to run your mouth. Let's see you put some facts behind your noise.

I wish the archives here didn't disappear into some wretched unrecoverable abyss, I'm beginning to tire of having to re-do hours of research to satisfy those who demand proof the earth is round.

I claimed "It has been widely reported for more than five years that Hussein was overtly buying influence in the UN Security Council."

For partial support of this, one need look no further than the very article which served as the impetus for this thread and linked at the top. Apparently you failed to read it. I don't know if that is because you haven't quite mastered the mouse-click or if there is more malignant reason.

What claim are you demanding I prove? That Iraq was buying influence among the UNSC? That France and Russia had significant financial stakes in the Hussein regime? My GOD! What cave have you been hiding in for the last several years?

I note that you continue to ignore #2 (though it is obvious why you do). You also ignored #3, but your claim in that arena was just as bogus as #2. I'm sure you will make more empty promises to respond later ... and promptly disappear again.

I will give you your list in my next post.

You continue to fail to list those 100 countries, so it seems like an ignorable point.

 

[Rogue]

Ummmm...as an impartial party to this argument as it stands, I think that the onus is on you Bowfinger to provide at least half of your "100 or so" nations opposed and then state their reasoning with regards to the situation. You're doing the equivalent of asking a question that you don't know the answer to just for the sake of sounding like you know what you're talking about and it doesn't make your views look very "reputable" in this discussion at all. You could solve at least part of this dispute by naming at least some of these "100 or so" nations yourself, but alas it seems you're sidestepping your own question while expecting everyone else to answer it for you.

 

[sandorski]

Alright, do some simple math guys: Total Nations - Coalition of the Willing = Voila answer.

Remember: "If you are not with us, you are against us" Using that, those "For" are 40ish Nations, grab he figure of "Total Nations" - 40ish = ??