Oil-for-Food/UN scandal deepens...
 

Tell me again why we're still tolerating the UN?... :mad: We need to cancel our membership and give them the boot NOW! :mad:

____________________________________


U.N. to Detail Kickbacks Paid for Iraq's Oil


By WARREN HOGE
Published: October 27, 2005


UNITED NATIONS, Oct. 26 - More than 4,500 companies took part in the United Nations oil-for-food program and more than HALF of them paid illegal surcharges and kickbacks to Saddam Hussein, according to the independent committee investigating the program.

The country with the most companies involved in the program was Russia, followed by France, the committee says in a report to be released Thursday. The inquiry was led by Paul A. Volcker, former chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.


Forum: The Transition in Iraq

The findings are in the committee's fifth and final report, a document of more than 500 pages that will detail how outside companies from more than 60 countries were able to evade United Nations controls and make money for themselves as well as for the Hussein government.

Three investigators who described their findings in interviews declined to name the companies, though they said the companies would be identified in the document on Thursday. They refused to speak on the record about the report until it is released.

The new report studies the people outside Iraq who profited illicitly and how they did it. It will identify companies and individuals who took part, both deliberately and inadvertently, and will chronicle in detail the experience of 30 to 40 of them, the investigators said.

In an interview, Mr. Volcker said that while he knew the naming of companies and the exposure of international "machinations" would draw attention, he hoped it would not obscure his committee's purpose in keeping the focus of their work on the need for United Nations reform.

"In my mind," he said, "this part of our investigation, looking at the manipulation of the program outside the U.N., strongly reinforces the case that the U.N. itself carries a large part of this responsibility and needs reform.

"Even though we are looking at it from the outside, it kind of screams out at you, 'Why didn't somebody blow a whistle?' The central point is that it all adds up to the same story. You need some pretty thoroughgoing reforms at the U.N."

Those manipulating the program ranged from established trading companies to front companies set up for the purpose, and included some companies of international reputation as well as many well known in their home countries, the investigators said.

Mr. Hussein received $1.8 billion in illicit income from surcharges and kickbacks on the sales of oil and humanitarian goods during 1996-2003, when the program ran, the committee concluded in its last report in September.

Earlier Volcker committee reports summarizing the year and a half of inquiries have examined the activities of the United Nations, finding the institution's management inept and corrupt, and providing evidence that the program's former director, Benon V. Sevan, received kickbacks himself. He has denied any wrongdoing.

The $64 billion program was set up by the Security Council to help ease the effects of United Nations sanctions on the 27 million Iraqis by supplying food and medicines in exchange for letting the Hussein government export oil.

The investigators said Thursday's report would detail how Mr. Hussein first steered the program to gain political advantage with political allies and countries in a position to ease the United Nations sanctions. Both Russia and France are veto-bearing members of the Security Council.

"Then it got corrupted with a capital C when Saddam figured out how to make money off of it by putting on the surcharges and kickbacks," one investigator said.

At first, he said, companies balked at paying the extra fees, and the oil sales slowed. At that point, "less orthodox companies" came forward and accepted the terms, opening the way for the program's full scale exploitation and allowing legitimate companies to buy oil from illegitimate ones.

Another investigator noted that in the years immediately preceding the program, smuggling of Iraqi oil in much larger amounts had been going on for years to the benefit of the economies of American allies, including Jordan and Turkey. In his last report, Mr. Volcker said this smuggling amounted to $10.99 billion.

This investigator suggested that this had a compromising effect on the Security Council's willingness to step in and stop the practice. "Three years, four years already, letting the oil flow into Jordan and Turkey, so now you're going to be very strict about this smaller volume of oil?" he asked. "Unlikely."

All the companies named have been notified, and many have replied, with some of their responses reflected in the final report, an investigator said.

"The responses range from absolute denial to complete admittance," he said. "Some said, 'We had no knowledge of it' - that's a pretty standard response - and some said, 'If we paid it, we don't know we paid it.' "

Mr. Volcker has noted in the past that his committee is not a law-enforcement body, and expects the information it gathers to be turned over to national prosecutors. The committee is expected to close down at the end of November, and investigators declined to discuss whether it might extend its life beyond then.

The committee said some companies had complained that the evidence against them was gathered in Iraq and was therefore not trustworthy. But a lead investigator said that in those cases where corroborating evidence was available, the Iraqi information turned out to be sound.

"Everybody down the line kept very meticulous records because Saddam told them, 'You get the surcharge from everybody,' " he said. "So they all wanted to document how they got the surcharge."

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/27/international/middleeast/27food.html
_____________________________

Mike

What a surprise.

When I worked in the City years ago we frequently had UN apparatchicks as customers,I found them be for the most part insufferably arrogant,reeking of entitlement as if their connection with that "humanitarian" institution endowed them with a semi-divine status.

Not at all surprising. Your experience echoes the sentiments of other friends and acquaintances of mine who have had dealings with them as well.

Mike

Yeah we were so outraged about companies dealing with Iraq we elected the CEO of one to be POTUS.

THE US OUT OF THE US NOW!!!!

Mike . . . American's shocked that there's corruption and graft in large organizations, or in the government? That's funny, do you have any more breaking news?

Let's don't get started on THAT stale kettle of kippers........... :eek:

Who was in charge here when this all was allowed to take place......


Here's a hint.....it wasn't Bush.

No, he was busy picking the head of FEMA at the time . . . :D

BS......This all took place when Bush was Still Gov of Texas...and your guy was whoring around instead of doing his job.

Yeah, Bush only lost 9 Billion in Iraq. Gone, can't account for it.

better than what allowed the Oil for Food scandle to run rampant for 8 years...plus there is one less middle eastern despot now.

And we all know your guys wanted it to keep going too. Just like the French and Germans were hoping for.

What a great argument: Which powermonger is the least corrupt.

Bot

Well, he may have been govenor when the program was first implemented, but according to the U.S. State Department's web site:

In May 2002, the United States led an initiative to streamline UN procedures for the export of goods into Iraq under the Program. This authorized the export of all goods, except those prohibited under the arms embargo or contained on a list of “dual-use” items that could have military or weapons of mass destruction applications. Items on this list, the so-called “Goods Review List,” are subject to special review procedures.

In spite of Iraqi subversion, Oil-for-Food has been a dramatic success. $25 billion in humanitarian supplies and equipment have been delivered to Iraq, and another $10 billion is in the pipeline. Caloric intake has doubled, and communicable diseases have declined significantly among the Iraqi population. The transportation, agriculture, and electricity sectors have also been rehabilitated. In his November 2002 Report to the Security Council on the Oil-for-Food Program, the UN Secretary-General observed that “the program has made and continues to make a major difference in the lives of ordinary Iraqis.”

don't Pull this crap that this all happened only under Bush....Clinton went out of his way to suck up to the UN and the people there who were taking bribes left and right.......I'd be surprised if he wasn't getting money somehow.

We all know the Billions that France, Germany and Russia got to block every proposal to make Saddam follow the cease fire agreement he agreed to.

Now that my be normal in most third world countries and Louisiana...but its not legal or acceptile in most of the developed world.

I'm glad to see you're feeling better.

Glad to be feeling better...pneumonia sucks.....would not wish that upon anyone.

Happy to see you're doing well,my wife's leukemia seems to be responding well to chemo,so good health to us all.

Thats great to hear too....hate to see good people suffer.

Joy of joys--I threw away my crutches and knee brace. I raise a shot glass of my favorite bourbon to Bonehead and to Carlton's wife. To our improved health. :)

Nope, according to the report the kickbacks and surcharges started mid 1999 and really took off in 2000 and lasted until 2003.

[QUOTE=mikemover]Tell me again why we're still tolerating the UN?... :mad: We need to cancel our membership and give them the boot NOW! :mad:

:beerchug: You're my man, Mike !! Go tell your Prez.

Mind you, a 1,8 billion bribe (approx. 5%) on a total programme worth some 40 billion is actually a very common business practice in these parts of the world. Any businesman working in these areas knows: no bribe, no deal. I believe these these 'fees' tax deductible aswell.

[QUOTE=Vronsky]Whether or not it's "common practice" is irrelevent to the question of it being right. And it's not tax deductable, at least not in the US

You better produce proof of that becasue this goes way back to the begining of the Food for oil program....and that was proven very early on.

President Bush was never the CEO of a company that was part of the Oil for Food program.

Got anything USEFUL to say?......

Mike

I never said I was shocked or surprised. Quite the contrary, actually.

It just chaps me that we as a nation are still VOLUNTARILY a part of this band of thieves (the UN).

Mike

Bribes are tax deductible???.....

....That's fine if you don't mind bribery and corruption being a "common business practice" in your part of the world. You can have it, then. In THIS part of the world, a lot responsible people are working hard to end such things.

...And I certainly don't want to be giving tacit endorsement of such things by continuing to be a part of a group like the UN.

Mike

Shocked again, Mike?
Welcome to the real world, Alice. Do the names Enron, Worldcom, Haliburton, etc, etc, ring a bell?
I suggest you get out more.

Worldcom had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein or the Oil for food scam.

Yeah, I've got something useful to say, cleanup on Aisle 7, get on it.

When Cheney was running Halliburton, it sold more equipment to Iraq than any other company did. As first reported by The Financial Times on Nov. 3, 2000, Halliburton subsidiaries submitted $23.8 million worth of contracts with Iraq to the United Nations in 1998 and 1999 for approval by its sanctions committee.

Halliburton also has had dealings with Iran and Libya, both on the State Department’s list of terrorist states. Halliburton’s subsidiary Brown & Root, the Texas construction firm that does much business with the U.S. military, was fined $3.8 million for re-exporting goods to Libya in violation of U.S. sanctions.

Halliburton Logging Services, a former subsidiary, was charged with shipping six pulse neutron generators through Italy to Libya. In 1995, the company pled guilty to criminal charges that it violated the U.S. ban on exports to Libya. Halliburton was fined $1.2 million and will pay $2.61 million in civil penalties.

I better produce proof or what?

Here's the report, knock yourself out.

http://www.iic-offp.org/story27oct05.htm

so where in the volumous thing does it make those claims..I don't have a week to read it all.

Several years into the Programme, Iraq realized it could generate illicit income outside the United Nations' oversight by requiring it's oil buyers to pay "surcharges" of generally between ten to thirty cents per barrel of oil. As described more fully below, the surcharge policy started in the autumn of 2000 and lasted through the autumn of 2002.

page 2

So explain all the French and German Munitions dating to te mid 90's adn the bribes to france germany and Russia very early into the program...

Convieniently about th etime they started being obstructionists...


early in the Clinton years....way before Bush too office and rendered that program moot and allowed it to be uncovered by the very Iraq campain you so venomously opposed.

There were none, now you prove there was.

Its in that report....we found the documents in Saddams palace....Those same documents are what forced the UN into doing the investigation...the one they so badly tried to inhibit by shredding files in mass.

I'm not saying Clinton was in the middle of it...( but I bet he was) but that it happened during his 8 years of ignoring Saddams escapades.

Really? Where in the report?

about 100 pages before the quotes that claim it all happened on Bushes watch..You know ehre those are so backtrack a little.

I was personally saddened to see Daimler-Chrysler on the list of "bad boys" but somewhat bemused at the amount.

I'll just overlook this pointless, irrelevant, juvenile crap, and get on to the important stuff.

Two things:

1. You claimed that we "elected the CEO to be POTUS". Dick Cheney is NOT the President of the United States. Perhaps you should pay more attention to these minor little details.

2. I never made any claim that Halliburton had a spotless record. Regardless, it does not make the UN any less guilty of rampant corruption and gross incompetence in managing the oil-for-food program.

Mike

I get out PLENTY, thank you.

I already said that I was hardly shocked or surprised at any of this. Perhaps you, too, should pay more attention.

Corporate corruption is nothing new, just as corruption in the UN is nothing new. Just because something is common does not mean that it is legal, ethical, or OK to do. Wrong is wrong, no matter how many people are doing it. If this kind of stuff is "OK" with you as a "common business practice", then I'd suggest you reconsider your values.

Mike

1. I know who the POTUS is. Cheney being president was a small joke which was, not surprisingly, lost on you.

2. No you never mentioned Halliburton, never expected you would. Because it's so much more fun to shout about the UN while ignoring our own hypocricy. No surpises you missed that point also.

1. I didn't miss the joke. I just ignored it, because:
a. It's a very old, very tired joke already
b. The crap that the UN is getting away with is no laughing matter.

2. I hardly missed your point about Halliburton either. You're just pointing out the obvious. It is common knowledge that they are far from being without "sin".

It is also common knowledge that they are pretty much the ONLY company on this planet that is even remotely capable of actually doing the enormous variety of jobs that they do--on a far more enormous scale than most people can even visualize--for our military and our nation. The company's services are necessary for us right now, and they serve our purposes. The UN is not necessary, and does not serve our purposes.

Like I said... Halliburton's problems, nor your dislike of Cheney/Bush/whomever, doesn't absolve the UN of its many sins.

You're starting to sound like bonehead, with his "Yeah, but what about Bill Clinton? He did this and that" distraction tactics.

Mike

I don't think the joke was "lost", it's just simply not funny and really tiresome after the 1 X10^6 th time you hear it.

Ironic how the WMD evidence is called "lies" yet every intelligence service in the world supported the claim. Yet the "oil for food", (of which several prominent anti-war folks like MP Galloway profited and used their political power to oppose Hussein's overthrow) is passed off as "oh yeah, Halliburton did it too" when ample evidence proves that there was corruption at the very tops of the governments most opposed to Saddam's removal. Especially in the light of Halliburton being cleared of wrongdoing by a 3rd party audit.

But hey "UN lied, People Died!"

No you didn't "ignore" it, you posted

Evidently you thought pointing out that Cheney was VP was "important" Thanks for the insight.

That you think the UN is not necessary or doesn't serve our purposes is just idiotic. That the right wing gets their panties in a bunch over this oil for food scam, which didn't cost US taxpayers a nickel, but will ignore the BILLIONS our gov have pissed away in the same country is just embarrassing.

The kickback was $7,500 roughly? The contract couldn't have been too big for that. Someone was probably selling some parts -- 10 transmissions, some brake parts, say 5 new engines, rear axles, and some misc. Wouldn't take much to cover that amount real quick.

Maybe they thought it was a registration fee. :sun_smile

I believe the U.N. gang pointed out that they had little experience in administering a flow of money and goods that large. People are greedy. Everywhere. Here specially. How else did we get to be 5% of world pop. using 35% of resouces?

Lost in all of this is the fact that a lot of Iraqis got relief from Oil for Food. I wish more of them would show some appreciation.

Yes, what a surprise. Your take home message from the UN scandal is:

UN - just overworked and underexperienced. They couldn't help themselves.

USA - bad overusers of the poor defensless world. It's really our fault.

There is plenty of evidence that Sadam, Russia and France benefited from the oil for food program, I suspect many of the Iraqi people you want to "show some appreciation" have been killed by our military occupation forces.

I would posit that more of them were killed by former baathists and other various terrorist groups.

It seems that the huge voter turnout in January and October are fine examples of the Iraqi people's "appreciation".

I suspect that most of the people in Iraq that benefited from the program were members of the Baath party - and many of the hard liners are now dead.