Russia,France and China received more than half of the vouchers issued by Saddam Hussein, and they were his strongest supporters in the U.N. Security Council, and the most outspoken critics of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Weird huh?
http://www.eco.freedom.org/el/20050302/oil-food.shtml
Oil-for-food scam revealed
By Henry Lamb
Saddam Hussein embezzled at least $21.3 billion from the U.N.'s Oil for Food program between 1997 and 2003, according to the Senate Committee on Government affairs. What may well be the largest corruption-eruption in the history of the world comes to rest at the doorstep of U.N. Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, who is directly responsible for the program. The world would never have known about this scam, had U.S. soldiers not retrieved the documents which Saddam could not destroy before his hasty retreat from Baghdad.
The facts about UNSCAM are just coming to light, as thousands of documents are being discovered and explored through several independent investigations. The more that is learned, the clearer it becomes that the true extent and influence of this horrendous episode of treachery will never be fully known. But enough is known to lead Claudia Rosett, a leading investigative reporter, to declare "that the U.N. itself was either corrupt, or so stunningly incompetent, as to require total overhaul."
Background
To even begin to grasp the magnitude of this scam, it is necessary to examine both the process and the players. The trail leads from Baghdad to Russia to Africa to France - and to 44 other countries - winding up at the United Nations' headquarters in New York.
The idea for the oil for food program likely came from Kofi Annan himself, well before he became Secretary-General. Shortly after the first Gulf war, Annan, then Assistant Secretary-General for Program Planning, Budget and Finance, was sent to Iraq to "facilitate the repatriation of more than 900 international staff and citizens of Western countries from Iraq. He subsequently led the first United Nations' team negotiating with Iraq on the sale of oil to fund purchases of humanitarian aid," according to Annan's official U.N. biography.
The design of the scam, however, bears the fingerprints of another outsider: billionaire Marc Rich. A report of the House Government Reform Committee in 2001, confirms Rich's dealing with Saddam Hussein since the early 1990s. The report details loans by Rich directly to Saddam, which were to be repaid later with preferential treatment on oil prices.
Rich fled the U.S. to Switzerland in 1983, to escape indictments for racketeering, tax evasion and trading in oil with Ayatollah Khomeini's Iran. He gained favor with the Russian government by importing and supplying grain through his various Swiss front-companies, despite the grain embargo the U.S. had imposed in response to Russia's invasion of Afghanistan.
When the Soviet Union began to collapse, in the early 1990s, Rich was well-positioned to do business with Russian political big shots, and even the Communist Party. Typically, he would make a deal with the director of a state-owned company to sell Rich a commodity, particularly aluminum, at five to ten percent of the world market price. In return, Rich would deposit a significant percentage of the profit into a private Swiss account for the Russian director, when the commodity was sold at as much as ten times the price he paid for it.
This is essentially the same model Saddam used in his embezzlement scam, except that he gave oil vouchers to those who helped him, rather than Swiss bank accounts. The vouchers authorized the collection of oil, at heavily-discounted prices, from the Kirkuk-Banias pipeline terminal in Syria. Oil traders eagerly purchased these vouchers from recipients at prices that ranged from ten to thirty-five cents per barrel. A voucher for a million barrels could produce from $100,000 to $350,000 to the voucher recipient. The oil trader could then sell the discounted oil at market prices, for huge profits.
Saddam used this revenue to purchase goods at inflated prices, providing that the vendor agreed to substantial kickbacks. Vouchers were also used instead of cash, to acquire items that ranged from limousines to grenade launchers, which were not allowed under the sanctions regime.
The Duelfer report says voucher recipients made the payments by carrying bags of cash to Iraqi embassies in Amman, Beirut, Moscow, Ankara, Geneva and Hanoi, among other places. The cash was then sent to Baghdad via diplomatic pouches.
This scheme was in place long before the Oil for Food program, but the Syrian oil terminal could only handle 200,000 barrels per day, and was Saddam's only port that was willing to violate the U.N. sanctions imposed after the Gulf war. The Oil for Food program opened the floodgates, so to speak, by eventually removing all limitations on Iraq's oil sales.
One of biggest buyers of Saddam's oil is a Swiss-based company called Glenco Re, run by Marc Rich. Rich's firm received, directly, vouchers for 12 million barrels, according to documents analyzed by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). A CIA investigation report by Charles Duelfer, released October 6, 2004, said Glenco Re had paid $3.2 million in kickbacks to Saddam. Glenco Re's three largest shareholders are directors of aluminum companies that befriended Rich when he plundered Russia's aluminum industry.
Rich, and a New York associate, Ben Pollner, who heads Taurus Oil, (which directly received vouchers for one million barrels) also arranged oil deals for Saddam with politicians and front-companies around the world.
Marc and Denise Rich 1986
Marc Rich was among the people pardoned during the last hours of the Clinton Presidency.
Rich's ex-wife, Denise, contributed more than $1.3 million to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign, the Democratic National Party, and to the Clinton Library. When called before a Congressional hearing, Ms. Rich refused to answer the committee's questions, by invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
The Scam
The magnitude of UNSCAM is not yet known. Documents retrieved after the fall of Baghdad have revealed at least 1300 oil vouchers issued to individuals, companies, governments, political parties, and organizations in 50 countries. The Washington Post reports that 30 percent of these vouchers went to Russia. MEMRI reports that the government of Russia received vouchers for 1.36 billion barrels. Other Russian recipients include the Russian foreign ministry, the Russian Communist Party, members of the Russian parliament, and numerous other individuals, companies, and organizations.
France got 15 percent of the vouchers. The man Saddam considered to be a conduit to Jacques Chirac, Patrick Maugein, of the Trafigura company, received 25 million barrels. Former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua, received 12 million barrels. Michel Grimard, founder of the French-Iraqi Export Club, received 17.1 million barrels, and The French-Arab Friendship Association received 15.1 million barrels.
Ten percent of the vouchers were distributed in China. These three countries received more than half of the vouchers issued by Saddam Hussein, and they were his strongest supporters in the U.N. Security Council, and the most outspoken critics of the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
During the Oil for Food program, nearly $100 billion in oil transactions took place under the watchful eye of the United Nations. Reports were made every six months to the U.N. Security Council, indicating that the program was running smoothly, monitored by a private contractor headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland: Cotecna Inspection SA. It is now known that at least 20 percent of the money went directly to Saddam's private enterprises. Much of the money went into his palaces, and very little ultimately reached the people of Iraq. How could this happen?
The Oil for Food Program
The oil-for-food program was authorized by the United Nations Security Council through Resolution 986, April 14, 1995, with 2.2% to be deducted for administrative costs, and another .8 percent to be deducted to pay damage claims from Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. The program limited the quantity of oil that could be sold, described the goods that could be purchased, and specified how the proceeds were to be distributed geographically to the people. An oversight committee was to be appointed to monitor the program. The resolution also provided authority for the Secretary-General to engage "independent" monitoring services.
From this point forward, several events around the world, which at the time seemed unrelated to the Oil for Food Program, now appear to be connected in one way or another, to the ever- expanding scandal. Among the more significant are these:
Eight months after the program was authorized, then 22-year-old Kojo Annan, Kofi's son, was employed by Cotecna Inspection, a Swiss import/export inspection firm with 4000 employees in 150 offices scattered through 100 countries.
Osama bin Laden left Sudan in 1996 and settled in Afghanistan, nearly bankrupt, according to the 9/11 Commission report.
The relevance of these events will unfold.
Kofi Annan became U.N. Secretary-General January 1, 1997. The first shipment of medicine and food under the new Oil for Food program reached Iraq in March, nearly two years after the program was authorized. In hopes of making the program more efficient, Annan consolidated the program into a permanent U.N. department within the Secretariat in October, 1997 - the Office of the Iraq Program (OIP) - headed by a long-serving U.N. official, Benon Sevan. (Though he denies it, the Duelfer report says that Sevan was allocated 13 million barrels of oil, of which 7.3 million were cashed in.)
The following month, Saddam booted out the U.N. weapons inspectors, which were in Iraq as a condition of the peace agreement that ended the Gulf war.
In February, 1998, Kofi Annan, and the Ambassadors from France and Russia, prevailed upon the Security Council to increase the quantity of oil Iraq could sell, as well as the list of supplies that could be purchased, arguing that Saddam would be more cooperative if the U.N. would allow more aid to his people.
Annan traveled to Iraq to meet with Hussein on February 23. After the meeting, he emerged to announce to waiting TV cameras: "Can I trust Saddam Hussein? I think I can do business with him." The inspectors returned (temporarily), and the oil for food program limits were lifted (permanently).
It may be a mere coincidence, but on that same day, Osama bin Laden declared war on America in his infamous "fatwa," published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi. In this document, he made four different references to Iraq, which he had never mentioned in his previous statements. He referred to "the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people" and specifically criticized the U.S.-led sanctions.
The 9/11 Commission report reveals that the following month, two al Qaeda members visited Baghdad, and that in July, "an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden." One month later, in August 1998, al Qaeda bombed the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
There is no hard evidence yet, of a Hussein/bin Laden partnership. But the fact that bin Laden's local assets were confiscated by Sudan before he was forced to leave the country, and that his family inheritance had been cut off by the time he reached Afghanistan, raises interesting questions about where he got the confidence to declare war on America, and the money to finance the embassy bombings - at about the same time Saddam's oil for food scam was swinging into high gear.
Kojo Annan
Kojo Annan told Fox News that "he has never been involved directly or indirectly with any business related to the United Nations. And Cotecna Inspection, the company Kojo worked for, also maintains that the younger Annan was never asked to deal with the United Nations."
Documents now being discovered tell a different story.
How business gets done
When, at 26, Kojo Annan joined the board of directors of Air Harbour Technologies in 1999, he stepped into a business that had its fingers in many different cookie jars. Owned and operated by Hani Yamani, son of Sheikh Yamani, the former Saudi oil minister, the company not only arranged oil deals, it was deeply involved in several construction projects in Zimbabwe, when Kojo joined the team. Leo Mugabe, nephew of Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe, was also on the AHT team.
AHT submitted a bid to construct a new Harare International Airport. AHT's bid was fourth among the bids recommended by Zimbabwe's contract review board. The President skipped over the first three bids to award the contract to AHT. The Harare airport was estimated to cost Z$5 billion (US$134.5 million). By the time of its completion in April 2001, the airport terminal had cost more than Z$7 billion (US$188.5 million).
After the airport award, another deal was struck for AHT to build a new mansion for the President, and in a separate deal with the President's wife, Grace, to build a hotel on land adjacent to the airport.
Yamani's local agent was a private company, Zidco, LTD, responsible for seeing that local payments were made to Yamani's construction crews. The company was operated by Zanu PF, the ruling political party, headed by Speaker of Parliament Emmerson Mnangagwa, who was also finance chief for the Zanu PF party.
The deals began to sour when a Yugoslav sub-contractor complained that he had not been paid. Then, claims emerged that sub-standard materials had been used in the airport construction.
In a damage-control effort to prevent a rift with President Robert Mugabe, Yamani sent a confidential letter to the President, dated July 15, 1999. He said that a "dirty conspiracy" had been actively seeking to destroy his relationship with President Mugabe and his family, in order to hide certain financial transactions. Yamani listed the names of all the people to whom he gave bribe money, to get the airport, and other construction projects. Among them were Mugabe's nephew, Leo ($190,000); several high-ranking government officials and members of the bid-review board; the PLO Ambassador Halimey; and the editor of the state-run newspaper. Yamani said the bribes totaled US$3 million.
Yamani said he had also agreed to lend US$50,000 to Mugabe's wife, Grace, to buy land near the airport on which he would build a hotel, and that he had donated US$50,000 to Mugabe's political party. He said he had also given more than $2 million into Zidco, LTD, for Mugabe's mansion, and the hotel project.
An independent newspaper that published a leaked copy of the letter was bombed, and the editor jailed.
Kojo's role, if any, in these events is not yet known. In Africa, however, the "Annan" name is quite valuable in gaining access to the halls of power. Zimbabwe, like most African nations, is an autocracy where this kind of corruption is considered the norm - the cost of doing business.
It is the same business climate which allowed Saddam to use the U.N.'s oil for food program to build his corrupt business empire.
Kojo officially left Cotecna as an employee in the Fall of 1997, but was retained as a "consultant." In July of 1998, he failed to report to Cotecna for a week, and was chastised by his supervisor. His July expense report claimed expenses for eight days' work, including six days in Abuja "during my father's visit to Nigeria," where he says he had no access to a fax or phone.
On August 28, Kojo received a fax from his Cotecna boss, praising his work at a meeting of world leaders in South Africa, and further instructs: "Your work and the contacts established at this meeting should ideally be followed up at the September '98 U.N. General Assembly in New York."
September was, indeed, a busy month for Kojo. The 12th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement met in Durban, South Africa. Kojo was there. He stayed at the Holiday Inn Garden Court, and signed his registration card "K Annan, United Nations." This hotel charge was billed to Cotecna as a business expense. He also claimed expenses and $500 a day for a 15-day trip to New York during the U.N. General Assembly - for meetings on "special projects."
On October 8, 1998, he used a Cotecna American Express card to charge a bill for $1,744.32 at a hotel in Washington. D.C., where the International Monetary Fund and World Bank had just held their annual meetings.
The next day, October 9, the U.N. Secretariat issued its request for bids to monitor the Iraq Oil for Food program.
November 24, 1998 - Kojo Annan faxed Cotecna's Geneva office a request for reimbursement of $4,000 in expenses for "business development trips to Abuja, [Nigeria]." That same day, in a confidential fax, the Cotecna official replied: "On the phone when we spoke on the 26th October we agreed to limit your consultancy fee to $5,000 per month as from the 1st November 1998."
December 31, 1998 - Cotecna was hired by the U.N. to monitor the Oil for Food program, at $6 million for the first year. When asked about the Kojo-Cotecna connection at the time, a U.N. spokesman, John Mills, (now deceased) said "The tender by Cotecna was the lowest by a significant margin," and that the U.N. had not been aware that Kojo was connected to Cotecna when the contract was awarded.
Kojo's boss at Cotecna's head office in Geneva, Switzerland, appears to have been the company's Senior Vice President, Andre Pruniaux, who became chief of Cotecna's U.N. Oil for Food contract.
In 1999, Kojo - then 26 - joined the board of directors of Air Harbour Technologies, of Nicosia, Cyprus. AHT, and its subsidiary, Hazy Investments, is owned by Hani Yamani, the son of Sheikh Yamani, the former Saudi oil minister. AHT's Zimbabwe representative is Leo Mugabe, nephew of President Robert Mugabe and chairman of Integrated Engineering Group.
In 2000, Yamani's AHT arranged a $60 million oil deal - through Hazy Investments - to sell two million barrels of Iraqi oil to a Moroccan company called Samir, according to the Sunday Times of London. The Times article quotes sources "close to the transaction" as saying: Yamani said Kojo was important to the Hazy deal. Kojo denies having any knowledge of the deal.
Kojo's first response to reporters who asked him about his connection with Cotecna was simply that he left the company in 1997, a year before the U.N. inspection contract was awarded. It is now known that he was vitally involved at U.N. meetings in the months immediately before the contract was awarded - at Cotecna's expense - and that he continued to receive monthly checks from Cotecna until February 26, 2004. It may also be just a coincidence, that on February 18, 2000, Kojo requested that Cotecna deposit expense reimbursements, "as discussed," into a Swiss account in the name of Sutton Sports Marketing, adding, "Kindly be advised that the above reference must be used for all future payments."
Conclusion
Kofi Annan bears full responsibility for designing, implementing, and accounting for the Oil for Food Program. But the world's indictment must go beyond Kofi Annan, and include the entire U.N. system that could allow this corruption to fester and grow for nearly seven years - without a peep about impropriety from any of the administering agencies or high-ranking officials.
The program allowed Saddam to sell all the oil he could produce. It allowed Saddam to decide to whom the oil would be sold, and at what price. It allowed Saddam to decide what he would buy, from whom, and at what price. The company hired to monitor the program - Cotecna Inspections SA - never raised a caution flag, even though we now know that some of the companies Saddam did business with didn't even exist, and others were companies he created for personal profit.
The sad fact is that everyone involved in the scam was happy, and profiting from the arrangement.
When the U.S. suggested that the U.N. finally give meaning to its 17 previous resolutions that threatened Iraq, the parties to the scam all objected. When the U.S. decided to ignore the U.N., and build its own coalition of the willing, the parties to the scam went ballistic.
Saddam was convinced that he had bought enough influence in the Security Council to keep the U.S. out of his affairs. He was wrong. France, Russia, and China were confident they could veto any U.S. action. They, too, were wrong. Had the United States not taken the action it did, when it did, the scam would still be flourishing. It is not.
Fault lies not only with Kofi Annan, and the officials who allowed this corruption to spawn and grow. The fault lies within the system itself. The United Nations is a secret society. Even now, after all the documents found in Iraq have been exposed, the U.N. will not release its records of the program. Its own investigation, headed by Paul Volker, provides to Volker only the information the U.N. chooses to give him. Volker has no power of subpoena, nor authority to compel testimony.
The U.N. is an autocratic society, accountable to no one; the oil for food fiasco is the result.
Oil for food..........
Oil for food..........
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Oil for food..........
what a lot of poppycock. everyone know that france, russia, and china are incorruptible. this is just propaganda designed to deflect attention away from the fact that the US is to blame for everything wrong in the world.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Oil for food..........
anastrophe wrote: what a lot of poppycock. everyone know that france, russia, and china are incorruptible. this is just propaganda designed to deflect attention away from the fact that the US is to blame for everything wrong in the world. OOPS.........I know we are. That can be our dirty little secret.
SSSSHHHTTTT I won't tell it is all rubble.
SSSSHHHTTTT I won't tell it is all rubble.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Oil for food..........
posted by anastrophe
what a lot of poppycock. everyone know that france, russia, and china are incorruptible. this is just propaganda designed to deflect attention away from the fact that the US is to blame for everything wrong in the world.
At least we don't kid ourselves that we're perfect. Believe it or not this is freely reported in the media over here. If it bothers you so much why not just withdraw from the UN altogether?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... 32,00.html
Documents released by the panel last week claimed former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua and British politician George Galloway also accepted allocations, charges both men deny.
Galloway has said he would appear at Tuesday's hearing to defend himself, but Coleman said he had yet to contact the panel.
Watch this when George Galloway appears in front of the senate commitee, it should make for good TV. Were it not for parliamentary privilege (or whatever it is called in the US) he would probably be suing by now. Don't have much time for him but the idea that anyone would bother bribing him in the first place is hilarious. Kind of makes it hard to take the other allegations as seriously as they should be. If there's evidence prosecute.
what a lot of poppycock. everyone know that france, russia, and china are incorruptible. this is just propaganda designed to deflect attention away from the fact that the US is to blame for everything wrong in the world.
At least we don't kid ourselves that we're perfect. Believe it or not this is freely reported in the media over here. If it bothers you so much why not just withdraw from the UN altogether?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... 32,00.html
Documents released by the panel last week claimed former French Interior Minister Charles Pasqua and British politician George Galloway also accepted allocations, charges both men deny.
Galloway has said he would appear at Tuesday's hearing to defend himself, but Coleman said he had yet to contact the panel.
Watch this when George Galloway appears in front of the senate commitee, it should make for good TV. Were it not for parliamentary privilege (or whatever it is called in the US) he would probably be suing by now. Don't have much time for him but the idea that anyone would bother bribing him in the first place is hilarious. Kind of makes it hard to take the other allegations as seriously as they should be. If there's evidence prosecute.
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Oil for food..........
gmc wrote: posted by anastrophe
At least we don't kid ourselves that we're perfect. Believe it or not this is freely reported in the media over here. If it bothers you so much why not just withdraw from the UN altogether?
i hardly think we're perfect. i merely think we're not nearly as bad as we are portrayed by the leftist that crawl through every nook and cranny of the EU.
i'm being facetious, of course. but the constant drumbeat of demonization wears mighty thin. i'm sure it does get reported in the media over there. where are the streets filled with protesters? ah, right.
At least we don't kid ourselves that we're perfect. Believe it or not this is freely reported in the media over here. If it bothers you so much why not just withdraw from the UN altogether?
i hardly think we're perfect. i merely think we're not nearly as bad as we are portrayed by the leftist that crawl through every nook and cranny of the EU.
i'm being facetious, of course. but the constant drumbeat of demonization wears mighty thin. i'm sure it does get reported in the media over there. where are the streets filled with protesters? ah, right.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
Oil for food..........
posted by anastrophe
i hardly think we're perfect. i merely think we're not nearly as bad as we are portrayed by the leftist that crawl through every nook and cranny of the EU.
i'm being facetious, of course. but the constant drumbeat of demonization wears mighty thin. i'm sure it does get reported in the media over there. where are the streets filled with protesters? ah, right.
Leftist? leftist what. Of course it gets reported what do you think happens? What constant drumbeat of demonisation? What on earth are you reading or watching come to that? Mind you I only see CNN and CBS because they are free channels with the cable provider.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 445609.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4550859.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4549379.stm
http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/ ... 66,00.html
i hardly think we're perfect. i merely think we're not nearly as bad as we are portrayed by the leftist that crawl through every nook and cranny of the EU.
i'm being facetious, of course. but the constant drumbeat of demonization wears mighty thin. i'm sure it does get reported in the media over there. where are the streets filled with protesters? ah, right.
Leftist? leftist what. Of course it gets reported what do you think happens? What constant drumbeat of demonisation? What on earth are you reading or watching come to that? Mind you I only see CNN and CBS because they are free channels with the cable provider.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 445609.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4550859.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4549379.stm
http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/ ... 66,00.html
-
anastrophe
- Posts: 3135
- Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 12:00 pm
Oil for food..........
gmc wrote: posted by anastrophe
Leftist? leftist what.
uh, leftists. you know - those on the left. i thought you were a leftist.
Of course it gets reported what do you think happens?
didn't i just say that?
What constant drumbeat of demonisation? What on earth are you reading or watching come to that?
uh, gmc, i come to that from your comments, and the comments of darn near every brit who posts here on FG. the conversation inevitably comes round to the faults of the US.
Leftist? leftist what.
uh, leftists. you know - those on the left. i thought you were a leftist.
Of course it gets reported what do you think happens?
didn't i just say that?
What constant drumbeat of demonisation? What on earth are you reading or watching come to that?
uh, gmc, i come to that from your comments, and the comments of darn near every brit who posts here on FG. the conversation inevitably comes round to the faults of the US.
[FONT=Franklin Gothic Medium][/FONT]
-
Philadelphia Eagle
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 8:50 am
Oil for food..........
GMC - The United Nations is presently frightened out of its tiny, leftist mind that we would withdraw.
We pay around 30% of their costs and no other nation on earth is willing ,even collectively, to cover that huge amount.
Kofi Annan has been advised by a group of international statesmen(including from UK) that the UN cannot survive without United States support. He now, belatedly, understands that and is doing his best to undertake an urgent repair job in relationships.
It's probably giong to be 'too little too late' however.
The UN's image is so tarnished under his leadership that it can only recover when someone new takes over.
Have you heard of John Bolton? He is likely to be the next US Ambassador to the UN. If you haven't you soon will. He is a hard hitting no-nonsense individual whose views on the UN in its present state are well known. They are not complimentary.
We pay around 30% of their costs and no other nation on earth is willing ,even collectively, to cover that huge amount.
Kofi Annan has been advised by a group of international statesmen(including from UK) that the UN cannot survive without United States support. He now, belatedly, understands that and is doing his best to undertake an urgent repair job in relationships.
It's probably giong to be 'too little too late' however.
The UN's image is so tarnished under his leadership that it can only recover when someone new takes over.
Have you heard of John Bolton? He is likely to be the next US Ambassador to the UN. If you haven't you soon will. He is a hard hitting no-nonsense individual whose views on the UN in its present state are well known. They are not complimentary.
America the Beautiful :-6
website - home.comcast.net/~nmusgrave/
website - home.comcast.net/~nmusgrave/
Oil for food..........
yes, but didn`t George Galloway have first option on all Saddam`s oil???! .....................
Oil for food..........
posted by anastrophe
uh, leftists. you know - those on the left. i thought you were a leftis
Depends how you define it, leftist, socialist, liberal do not have the same pejorative connotation in the UK as they do in the US. Liberal here still has the meaning of someone who believes in individual freedom, moderate social reform, freetrade etc. In US terms it seems to denote communist or something. Right wing here is another name for fascist. Even our conservatives are social democratic in nature.
Left wing: In politics, the socialist parties. The term originated in the French national assembly of 1789, where the nobles sat in the place of honour to the right of the president, and the commons sat to the left. This arrangement has become customary in European parliaments, where the progressives sit on the left and the conservatives on the right. It is also usual to speak of the right, left, and centre, when referring to the different elements composing a single party.
You tell me. Who the heck would want to be right wing? Personally I'm with the people.
The British national Party is the british nazi party in modern guise. The communist party is on the fringe and their hay day is long past. The labour party have lost it and may be in their death throes, if Tony Blair sticks around i think they will lose their traditional supprt base, like Maggie Thatcher he may destroy the party he is supposed to lead
So what exactly do you mean by leftist?
posted by anastrophe
uh, gmc, i come to that from your comments, and the comments of darn near every brit who posts here on FG. the conversation inevitably comes round to the faults of the US.
It's kind of hard not to comment on international politics without mentioning the United States. But if you are talkng about policies towards third world countries-imbalance in trade, unfair trade agreements etc then european nations are right in there with the US. If you really want me to there are just as many articles criticising the EU as there are the US, depends if you want to read them or not.
If you want to talk about who was flogging Saddam the chemical factories to make his mustard gas etc then french and german companies were selling with the best of them. it wasn''t just the CIA training the mujahadeen the British were at it as well.
Americans seem to have lost the capacity to be critical of their own government and believe everything they are told without question, anyone disagreing seems to get shouted down as anti american-never mind they might have a valid point.
You have troops dying every day in Iraq and many more coming back with their lives destroyed. If you care about your troops surely the question "was this the only choice" is a reasonable one. You were lied to about WMD and about Iraq having any connection to 911. Far from promoting democracy when it is in US interests you back up and keep in power oppressive regimes so long as they oppose anything that even hints of being communist. You seem to have a real blind spot that makes assume criticism of US policy is just blind anti americanism.
You go on about corruption in the UN, quite rightly so, but don't seem to think halliburton and other american companies doing well out if the iraq situation are doing anything wrong, it's as if their culpability is immaterial
posted by Philadelphia Eagle
GMC - The United Nations is presently frightened out of its tiny, leftist mind that we would withdraw.
We pay around 30% of their costs and no other nation on earth is willing ,even collectively, to cover that huge amount.
Kofi Annan has been advised by a group of international statesmen(including from UK) that the UN cannot survive without United States support. He now, belatedly, understands that and is doing his best to undertake an urgent repair job in relationships.
It's probably giong to be 'too little too late' however.
The UN's image is so tarnished under his leadership that it can only recover when someone new takes over.
Have you heard of John Bolton? He is likely to be the next US Ambassador to the UN. If you haven't you soon will. He is a hard hitting no-nonsense individual whose views on the UN in its present state are well known. They are not complimentary.
You seem to think the UN and other nations should jut blindly fall in with what the us wants to do without criticising. Won't happen. After 911 you had the whole world on your side ready to take on al queda, and support you in a war on terrorism. Instead you blew all that goodwill by attacking a country that had nothing to do with it and telling everybody what they thought didn't matter.
OK maybe you don't need the UN and world opinion doesn't matter but do you want to lead he world by example or be the next empire?
Shouldn't do this late at night, but it's kind of hard trying to phrase things so that words don't give offence to people that seem to want to take umbrage at the slightest thing.
uh, leftists. you know - those on the left. i thought you were a leftis
Depends how you define it, leftist, socialist, liberal do not have the same pejorative connotation in the UK as they do in the US. Liberal here still has the meaning of someone who believes in individual freedom, moderate social reform, freetrade etc. In US terms it seems to denote communist or something. Right wing here is another name for fascist. Even our conservatives are social democratic in nature.
Left wing: In politics, the socialist parties. The term originated in the French national assembly of 1789, where the nobles sat in the place of honour to the right of the president, and the commons sat to the left. This arrangement has become customary in European parliaments, where the progressives sit on the left and the conservatives on the right. It is also usual to speak of the right, left, and centre, when referring to the different elements composing a single party.
You tell me. Who the heck would want to be right wing? Personally I'm with the people.
The British national Party is the british nazi party in modern guise. The communist party is on the fringe and their hay day is long past. The labour party have lost it and may be in their death throes, if Tony Blair sticks around i think they will lose their traditional supprt base, like Maggie Thatcher he may destroy the party he is supposed to lead
So what exactly do you mean by leftist?
posted by anastrophe
uh, gmc, i come to that from your comments, and the comments of darn near every brit who posts here on FG. the conversation inevitably comes round to the faults of the US.
It's kind of hard not to comment on international politics without mentioning the United States. But if you are talkng about policies towards third world countries-imbalance in trade, unfair trade agreements etc then european nations are right in there with the US. If you really want me to there are just as many articles criticising the EU as there are the US, depends if you want to read them or not.
If you want to talk about who was flogging Saddam the chemical factories to make his mustard gas etc then french and german companies were selling with the best of them. it wasn''t just the CIA training the mujahadeen the British were at it as well.
Americans seem to have lost the capacity to be critical of their own government and believe everything they are told without question, anyone disagreing seems to get shouted down as anti american-never mind they might have a valid point.
You have troops dying every day in Iraq and many more coming back with their lives destroyed. If you care about your troops surely the question "was this the only choice" is a reasonable one. You were lied to about WMD and about Iraq having any connection to 911. Far from promoting democracy when it is in US interests you back up and keep in power oppressive regimes so long as they oppose anything that even hints of being communist. You seem to have a real blind spot that makes assume criticism of US policy is just blind anti americanism.
You go on about corruption in the UN, quite rightly so, but don't seem to think halliburton and other american companies doing well out if the iraq situation are doing anything wrong, it's as if their culpability is immaterial
posted by Philadelphia Eagle
GMC - The United Nations is presently frightened out of its tiny, leftist mind that we would withdraw.
We pay around 30% of their costs and no other nation on earth is willing ,even collectively, to cover that huge amount.
Kofi Annan has been advised by a group of international statesmen(including from UK) that the UN cannot survive without United States support. He now, belatedly, understands that and is doing his best to undertake an urgent repair job in relationships.
It's probably giong to be 'too little too late' however.
The UN's image is so tarnished under his leadership that it can only recover when someone new takes over.
Have you heard of John Bolton? He is likely to be the next US Ambassador to the UN. If you haven't you soon will. He is a hard hitting no-nonsense individual whose views on the UN in its present state are well known. They are not complimentary.
You seem to think the UN and other nations should jut blindly fall in with what the us wants to do without criticising. Won't happen. After 911 you had the whole world on your side ready to take on al queda, and support you in a war on terrorism. Instead you blew all that goodwill by attacking a country that had nothing to do with it and telling everybody what they thought didn't matter.
OK maybe you don't need the UN and world opinion doesn't matter but do you want to lead he world by example or be the next empire?
Shouldn't do this late at night, but it's kind of hard trying to phrase things so that words don't give offence to people that seem to want to take umbrage at the slightest thing.