Oil for FRAUD...

[demon]

Saddams mass graves..Lancet study etc estc etc etc verification mass graves action....lets have it hehehe

 

[Matabiri]

Although, Britain and France have been at peace for a good long while.

France did spill our pint and look at us funny, but we let it go. This time.

 

[Ed]

France did spill our pint and look at us funny, but we let it go. This time.

That's cuz Kofie (now that is a gay name) got paid off.

Incidentially:

Jews
Palistinians
Guns=Good
Bush=Nazi

 

[Matabiri]

Jews
Palistinians
Guns=Good
Bush=Nazi

You're right - let's stay on-topic.

Atheists caused all these wars.

 

[geni]

OK, start in Africa and tell us all how, when they are not raping, they have reduced deaths. Then, tell us how they leapt into action in Kosevo. Finish up in the Mid-east.

Well the DRC is peacful by that countries standards right now.

 

[Ed]

OK, start in Africa and tell us all how, when they are not raping, they have reduced deaths. Then, tell us how they leapt into action in Kosevo. Finish up in the Mid-east.

Although, Britain and France have been at peace for a good long while.

And another thing....I wish I were the crooked black son of a crooked black SOB in a position of power. With liberal idiots like you, I would always get a pass. Come on, say something critical. Anything. It seems that the only sin you recognize is to be white and an american.

----sorry, directed to AUP------- Just felt a need to rant at his obvious racism.

 

[armageddonman]

OK, start in Africa and tell us all how, when they are not raping, they have reduced deaths. Then, tell us how they leapt into action in Kosevo. Finish up in the Mid-east.

So, what do you propose to improve the UN?

 

[Ed]

So, what do you propose to improve the UN?

First off I would replace that Kofi guy. I have heard Clinton's name mentioned, he would actually be a good choice. But I am pretty open. Secondly, I would make sure that their books are completely open and audited by a third party annually.

You have things like serial human rights abusers on key committees. How do you fix that? I don't have a clue. You also have a situation where it is almost impossible to get action when murder is occurring. How do you fix that? I don't know.

Perhaps the best idea is to re-create a UN as a League of Democratic Nations where having a democratically elected government is a prerequisite for admission. It is unclear to me what the presence of some of the member states brings to the party except to diminish any substantive action because of misplaced PC.

I think you can have whiney all inclusiveness or you can have productivity. It really comes down to what the role of the UN is. To me, at the moment, it looks like a great big Red Cross that also yaks about murder. Maybe it should be merged with the RC and Red Cresent and Mogen David and keep it's nose out of other affairs.

Unfortunately, I don't think that the UN is ameniable to change. I would probably replace it as noted above.

 

[Matabiri]

I think you can have whiney all inclusiveness or you can have productivity. It really comes down to what the role of the UN is. To me, at the moment, it looks like a great big Red Cross that also yaks about murder.

I think originally, that's what it was intended to be. Churchill described it as "Jaw jaw, rather than war war."

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

Demon : " I`m a Guinness man myself (you know, IRA and all that stuff), I don`t a mind Becks now and again, that`s Dark Becks that it. (Dark rum too)

What do you drink?"
Well I like a black and tan myself, Guinness alone is a bit to heavy.
As far as oil for food , I use nothing but extra virgin olive oil or on occasion white truffle oil.

 

[a_unique_person]

I agree Kofi Annan's denials are no different than Ken Lay's denials. If the same agency that was supposed to protect Iraqi civilians is really ripping them off for financial gain then what trust can we place in that same agancy to protect the rights of other people around the world....cough...bosnia...cough...Rwanda...cough

The UN is only the sum of it's constituents. There were armed forces on the ground, monitoring. If the warnings they were sending were ignored, then it is the responsibility of the UN members that ignored them to shoulder.

 

[Tmy]

Isnt blaming Kofi for Oil for food, akin to saying Bush should step down because there were no WMD's?

Heres what doesnt make sense. Lots of national leaders were against the invasion. Not just their UN stuffed shirts. Now why would these countries give the US intelligence that there WERE WMD's if they are all in cahoots with theis oil for food scam???

Wouldnt they tell the US that there were no weapons. That way they have no justification to invade and the Oil for Food $$ keeps rolling in.

 

[demon]

TillEulenspiegel:
"As far as oil for food , I use nothing but extra virgin olive oil or on occasion white truffle oil."

Truffle oil eh? Oooh, get you...good one

(I`ve never used it by the way, I`ll give it a try most definitely)

"What do you drink?"

Any good quality dark rum and good quality stout.

What about you? Apart from the odd black and tan that is.

 

[Ed]

I think originally, that's what it was intended to be. Churchill described it as "Jaw jaw, rather than war war."

Perhaps but now it is "jaw jaw about the war war". Quite different.

 

[Ed]

The UN is only the sum of it's constituents. There were armed forces on the ground, monitoring. If the warnings they were sending were ignored, then it is the responsibility of the UN members that ignored them to shoulder.

And since those are the consitituants of the UN it demonstrates the utter uselessness of said body.

 

[Ed]

Isnt blaming Kofi for Oil for food, akin to saying Bush should step down because there were no WMD's?

Heres what doesnt make sense. Lots of national leaders were against the invasion. Not just their UN stuffed shirts. Now why would these countries give the US intelligence that there WERE WMD's if they are all in cahoots with theis oil for food scam???

Wouldnt they tell the US that there were no weapons. That way they have no justification to invade and the Oil for Food $$ keeps rolling in.

Who knows who was on the pad. I suspect Ted Kennedy myself.

BUT did any country that had evidence that there were no WMD's go public and raise holy hell that the US was off it's rocker? It seems to me that a country with such information has an obligation to make it public to counter bad information if lives (and a war) are at stake. I don't really remember hearing a peep. It was a s though they did not think that WMD's rose to a level of importance to justify a war.

 

[a_unique_person]

And since those are the consitituants of the UN it demonstrates the utter uselessness of said body.

The US is a constituent.

IIRC, the UN under Anan has been keen to get Africa 'looking after it's own', which I presume the rest of the world would agree is a 'good thing'. However, it appears he understimated the speed and ferocity of the attack when it did come. I don't recall any other similar massacres in history. They have always been more protracted, and it would have been reasonable of Kofi to assume he had time to react to the attacks.

That said, the "utter uselessness of said body" is patently false.

 

[a_unique_person]

Who knows who was on the pad. I suspect Ted Kennedy myself.

BUT did any country that had evidence that there were no WMD's go public and raise holy hell that the US was off it's rocker? It seems to me that a country with such information has an obligation to make it public to counter bad information if lives (and a war) are at stake. I don't really remember hearing a peep. It was a s though they did not think that WMD's rose to a level of importance to justify a war.

Did you read Brown's post? The CIA had all the information needed already. The politicisation of the CIA ensured that the only messages that got out were the ones that Bush wanted to hear. The same process was followed in the UK and Australia. Individual employees knew that the claims were false as they were being made, the political process ensured these views never made it to see the light of day.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/14/60II/main577975.shtml

(CBS) In February, Secretary of State Colin Powell made a surprising admission.

He told The Washington Post that he doesn't know whether he would have recommended the invasion of Iraq if he had been told at the time that there were no stockpiles of banned weapons.

Powell said that when he made the case for war before the United Nations one year ago, he used evidence that reflected the best judgments of the intelligence agencies.

But long before the war started, there was plenty of doubt among intelligence analysts about Saddam's weapons.

One analyst, Greg Thielmann, told Correspondent Scott Pelley last October that key evidence cited by the administration was misrepresented to the public.

Thielmann should know. He had been in charge of analyzing the Iraqi weapons threat for Powell's own intelligence bureau.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I had a couple of initial reactions. Then I had a more mature reaction,” says Thielmann, commenting on Powell's presentation to the United Nations last February.

“I think my conclusion now is that it's probably one of the low points in his long, distinguished service to the nation."

Thielmann was a foreign service officer for 25 years. His last job at the State Department was acting director of the Office of Strategic Proliferation and Military Affairs, which was responsible for analyzing the Iraqi weapons threat.

He and his staff had the highest security clearances, and saw virtually everything – whether it came into the CIA or the Defense Department.

Thielmann was admired at the State Department. One high-ranking official called him honorable, knowledgeable, and very experienced. Thielmann had planned to retire just four months before Powell’s big moment before the U.N. Security Council.

On Feb. 5, 2003, Secretary Powell presented evidence against Saddam:
“The gravity of this moment is matched by the gravity of the threat that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction pose to the world."

At the time, Thielmann says that Iraq didn't pose an imminent threat to the U.S.: “I think it didn't even constitute an imminent threat to its neighbors at the time we went to war.”

And Thielmann says that's what the intelligence really showed. For example, he points to the evidence behind Powell’s charge that Iraq was importing aluminum tubes to use in a program to build nuclear weapons.

Powell said: “Saddam Hussein is determined to get his hands on a nuclear bomb. He is so determined that he has made repeated covert attempts to acquire high-specification aluminum tubes from 11 different countries even after inspections resumed.”

“This is one of the most disturbing parts of Secretary Powell's speech for us,” says Thielmann.

 

[a_unique_person]

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20030810/frontpage/72455.shtml an article that steps through the claims.

 

[zenith-nadir]

The oil for fraud program preceded the invasion of Iraq by several years a_u_p. U.N. employees were skimming money off the program for personal gain. The Secretary-General's son was in on it, the head of the oil for food program was in on it and the former Secretary-General of the UN was in on it.

That has nothing to do with Powell speeches, what the CIA said, what Bush wanted to hear or Saddam's WMD, as those events happened years a-f-t-e-r the skimming of money.So let's stop the obvious America bashing agenda and put this thread back on it's tracks;

Iraq Demands Oil-For-Food Diplomats Face Justice - Fri Feb 4,10:55 AM ET

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Anyone who stole from the U.N.'s oil-for-food program for Iraq must stand trial and the money be repaid to the Iraqi people, Iraq's human rights minister said Friday.

Bakhtiar Amin praised Thursday's report by Paul Volcker, the former head of the U.S. Federal Reserve charged with probing corruption in the program, and said it revealed that even U.N. dignitaries were not above robbing the poor for profit.